NUMSA obo Ramothibe and Others v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1655/22) [2025] ZALCJHB 60 (17 February 2025)

NUMSA obo Ramothibe and Others v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1655/22) [2025] ZALCJHB 60 (17 February 2025)

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The doctrines of team liability, derivative misconduct, and common purpose were considered and found not to apply to the facts of the case. The law on collective liability is settled, and there is no legitimate dispute regarding the applicable legal principles. The dismissal was found to be both procedurally and substantively fair, and there is no reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal does not meet the stringent threshold required by section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act.

Citation
[2025] ZALCJHB 60
Parties
Applicant: NUMSA obo Ramothibe & 55 Others; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Dialwa Alpheus Mathala N.O.; Respondent: Universal Tissue (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 February 2025
Case Number
JR1655/22
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment and Order Delivered on 05 August 2024.
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Judges
L. De Haan
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Collective Liability, Procedural Fairness, Substantive Fairness, Team Liability, Derivative Misconduct
Labour Law Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Collective Liability Procedural Fairness Substantive Fairness Team Liability Derivative Misconduct

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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

NUMSA obo Ramothibe & 55 Others

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Dialwa Alpheus Mathala N.O.

Respondent

Universal Tissue (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment and Order Delivered on 05 August 2024.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has reasonable prospects of success on appeal against the judgment and order delivered on 05 August 2024.
  2. 2 Whether the doctrines of team liability, derivative misconduct, or common purpose apply to the dismissed employees.
  3. 3 Whether the dismissal of employees was procedurally and substantively fair.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The doctrines of team liability, derivative misconduct, and common purpose were considered and found not to apply to the facts of the case. The law on collective liability is settled, and there is no legitimate dispute regarding the applicable legal principles. The dismissal was found to be both procedurally and substantively fair, and there is no reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal does not meet the stringent threshold required by section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • There is no order as to costs.