National Union of Metal Workers of South Africa and Others v Platinum League t/a Profab Engineering CC and Others (C363/2017) [2020] ZALCCT 11 (15 May 2020)
The application for contempt was dismissed because the applicants failed to provide proof that the arbitration award was certified as required by section 143(3) of the Labour Relations Act. Certification is a necessary jurisdictional fact for the Labour Court to grant a contempt order. The omission of such evidence...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] ZALCCT 11
- Parties
- Applicant: National Union of Metal Workers of South Africa; Applicant: Zenani Herbert; Respondent: Platinum League t/a Profab Engineering cc; Respondent: Jaco van Breed; Respondent: Verna Asia
- Court
- Labour Court Cape Town
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Case Number
- C363/2017
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Application / Contempt Application Heard on Papers; Opposed; Judgment Delivered
- Outcome
- Application dismissed; no order as to costs.
- Judges
- Rabkin-Naicker
- Legal Topics
- Contempt of Court, Certification of Arbitration Award, Practice Manual Compliance
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
National Union of Metal Workers of South Africa
Applicant
Zenani Herbert
Applicant
Platinum League t/a Profab Engineering cc
Respondent
Jaco van Breed
Respondent
Verna Asia
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Contempt Application Heard on Papers; Opposed; Judgment Delivered
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the respondents are in contempt of court for failing to comply with an arbitration award.
- 2 Whether the necessary jurisdictional facts for a contempt order were established.
- 3 Whether costs should be awarded against the applicants.
Ratio Decidendi
The application for contempt was dismissed because the applicants failed to provide proof that the arbitration award was certified as required by section 143(3) of the Labour Relations Act. Certification is a necessary jurisdictional fact for the Labour Court to grant a contempt order. The omission of such evidence was fatal to the applicants' case. The respondents' affidavit did not address certification but stated that financial obligations were met and that the matter was considered closed after employees did not return. No replying papers were filed by the applicants. The Court found no exceptional grounds to award costs and dismissed the application.
Court Disposition
Application dismissed; no order as to costs.
Orders
- The application is dismissed.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
30 paragraphs
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, CAPE TOWN
Not Reportable Case no: C363/2017
In the matter between:
NATIONAL UNION OF METAL WORKERS OF
SOUTH AFRICA
1st Applicant
ZENANI HERBERT
2nd to Further Applicants And
PLATINUM LEAGUE t/a
PROFAB ENGINEERING cc
First Respondent JACO VAN BREED
Second Respondent
VERNA ASIA
Third Respondent
Date heard: 13 May 2020 in Chambers
Delivered: By fax on 15 May 2020
JUDGMENT
RABKIN-NAICKER, J
[1] This application is heard on the papers by agreement between the parties. This is in terms of the Directives of the Judge President pursuant to the Covid 19 Lockdown.
[2] The application to find the respondents in contempt of Court is opposed by the respondents. For reasons unknown to me, the application was not dealt with as required by Clause 13 of the Practice Manual of the Labour Court. No ex parte order was granted by this Court although same was sought in the Notice of Motion. The application was instead treated as a normal opposed application and enrolled some years after it was filed on 21 November 2017. It appears from the Court file that the applicants requested a set down date on the 4 July 2019.
[3] The founding affidavit makes the allegation that on the 2 June 2016, the Award under case number MEWC 9610 was certified in terms of section 143(3) of the Labour Relations Act. However, no proof of same is annexed to the founding papers. Given that evidence of such certification is a necessary jurisdictional fact for this Court to be able to hand down a contempt order, the omission is fatal to applicants’ case.
[4] The opposing affidavit does not answer to specific allegations. It makes no mention of a certification of the Award or receipt of same. Its case is to the effect that it complied with the financial obligations ordered in the Award (which is not disputed) but alleges that on the 4 April 2016 when the employees were supposed to tender their services only some did so. Those that did were told that they could enter into a retrenchment process if they chose. The company did not hear from them again on its version, and considered the matter closed. No replying papers were filed by the applicants.
[5] The respondent company seeks costs in this matter. I find no exceptional grounds whatsoever to order these. It is not necessary for the Court to consider the submissions made on the law in civil contempt matters. This case stands to be dismissed on the grounds that a case was not made out on the founding papers. I therefore make the following order:
Order
1. The application is dismissed.
2. No order as to costs.
H. Rabkin-Naicker
Judge of the Labour Court
Representatives on the papers: Applicant: Numsa
Respondents: Swemmer and Levin