Ngoye and Others v Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa and Others (J111/21) [2021] ZALCJHB 21; (2021) 42 ILJ 1267 (LC) (2 March 2021)

Ngoye and Others v Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa and Others (J111/21) [2021] ZALCJHB 21; (2021) 42 ILJ 1267 (LC) (2 March 2021)

The Court found that the applicants' employment contracts were not limited to five years and did not contain expiry dates. The respondents failed to produce any documentation or factual basis to support the assertion that the contracts were fixed-term or that the termination was lawful. The abrupt termination of the applicants' contracts with immediate effect, without notice or due process, constituted a violation of the terms and conditions of their contracts and was therefore unlawful. The Labour Court has jurisdiction to determine claims of unlawfulness arising from employment contracts, and the application was urgent due to the exceptional circumstances, including reputational harm...

Citation
[2021] ZALCJHB 21
Parties
Applicant: Onica Martha Ngoye; Applicant: Nkosinathi Allen Khena; Applicant: Tiro Holele; Respondent: Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa; Respondent: Leonard Ramatlakane; Respondent: Thinavuyo Mpye; Respondent: Dinkeanyane Mohuba; Respondent: Smanga Sethene; Respondent: Xolile George; Respondent: Nosizwe Nokwe-Macamo; Respondent: Matodzi Mukhuba; Respondent: Themba Zulu; Respondent: Ms Thandeka Mabija
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 March 2021
Case Number
J111/21
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Final Judgment on Urgent Application
Outcome
Application granted. The termination of the applicants' contracts was declared unlawful and set aside. Applicants reinstated with immediate effect and retrospectively. Respondents ordered to pay salaries and benefits due from termination to reinstatement. Costs awarded against respondents except for costs of 11...
Judges
Baloyi M
Legal Topics
Unlawful Termination, Specific Performance, Jurisdiction of Labour Court, Urgency, Employment Contracts
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unlawful Termination Specific Performance Jurisdiction of Labour Court Urgency Employment Contracts

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Onica Martha Ngoye

Applicant

Nkosinathi Allen Khena

Applicant

Tiro Holele

Applicant

Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa

Respondent

Leonard Ramatlakane

Respondent

Thinavuyo Mpye

Respondent

Dinkeanyane Mohuba

Respondent

Smanga Sethene

Respondent

Xolile George

Respondent

Nosizwe Nokwe-Macamo

Respondent

Matodzi Mukhuba

Respondent

Themba Zulu

Respondent

Ms Thandeka Mabija

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Final Judgment on Urgent Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the termination of the applicants' employment contracts was unlawful.
  2. 2 Whether the Labour Court has jurisdiction to determine the lawfulness of the termination.
  3. 3 Whether the application was urgent and justified for urgent relief.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the applicants' employment contracts were not limited to five years and did not contain expiry dates. The respondents failed to produce any documentation or factual basis to support the assertion that the contracts were fixed-term or that the termination was lawful. The abrupt termination of the applicants' contracts with immediate effect, without notice or due process, constituted a violation of the terms and conditions of their contracts and was therefore unlawful. The Labour Court has jurisdiction to determine claims of unlawfulness arising from employment contracts, and the application was urgent due to the exceptional circumstances, including reputational harm...

Court Disposition

Application granted. The termination of the applicants' contracts was declared unlawful and set aside. Applicants reinstated with immediate effect and retrospectively. Respondents ordered to pay salaries and benefits due from termination to reinstatement. Costs awarded against respondents except for costs of 11...

Orders

  • This application is found to be urgent and, insofar as the applicants might not have complied with the Rules of this Court, their failure to do so is condoned, and the Rules relating to forms and service are dispensed with and the application is dealt with as one of urgency.
  • It is declared that the contracts of employment concluded by the applicants and the respondents are extant.