Panel World CC v Retselisitwe and Others (J285/20) [2020] ZALCJHB 118 (12 August 2020)

Panel World CC v Retselisitwe and Others (J285/20) [2020] ZALCJHB 118 (12 August 2020)

The court found that the applicant was entitled to relief on the face of the application. The respondent did not advance any substantive reason why the award should not be stayed, and the execution would result in the attachment of the applicant's tools of trade, effectively preventing it from trading. The interests of justice require that the writ of execution be stayed pending the finalisation of the review application. The matter was heard on an urgent basis in accordance with Rule 8, and no order as to costs was made.

Citation
[2020] ZALCJHB 118
Parties
Applicant: Panel World CC; Respondent: Moepa Retselisitwe; Respondent: Tsiliso Shasha N O; Respondent: CCMA; Respondent: Sheriff of the Court - Frankfort
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 August 2020
Case Number
J285/20
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Urgent Application for Stay of Writ Pending Review
Outcome
Application to stay the writ of execution pending review is granted.
Judges
F. Coetzee
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Review of Arbitration Award, Urgent Application, Tools of Trade Protection
Labour Law Civil Procedure Stay of Execution Review of Arbitration Award Urgent Application Tools of Trade Protection

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Panel World CC

Applicant

Moepa Retselisitwe

Respondent

Tsiliso Shasha N O

Respondent

CCMA

Respondent

Sheriff of the Court - Frankfort

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Stay Application / Urgent Application for Stay of Writ Pending Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the writ of execution should be stayed pending the finalisation of the review application.
  2. 2 Whether the execution of the arbitration award would render the applicant unable to trade.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant was entitled to relief on the face of the application. The respondent did not advance any substantive reason why the award should not be stayed, and the execution would result in the attachment of the applicant's tools of trade, effectively preventing it from trading. The interests of justice require that the writ of execution be stayed pending the finalisation of the review application. The matter was heard on an urgent basis in accordance with Rule 8, and no order as to costs was made.

Court Disposition

Application to stay the writ of execution pending review is granted.

Orders

  • The application is heard on an urgent basis in accordance with Rule 8.
  • The writ of execution issued on 11 February 2020 and executed by the fourth respondent on 28 February 2020 is stayed pending finalisation of the applicant's review in case number JR 2065/2019 of the award FSBF 27850-2019.