Police And prisons Civil Rights Union and Another v Mcaba (A5050/2013, 34814/2012) [2014] ZAGPJHC 247 (8 August 2014)

Police And prisons Civil Rights Union and Another v Mcaba (A5050/2013, 34814/2012) [2014] ZAGPJHC 247 (8 August 2014)

The court found that the appeal to the National Disciplinary Committee was indeed heard in June 2011, as evidenced by the appellants' consistent version and supporting documentation. The respondent did not dispute that the appeal had taken place, but rather challenged its procedural fairness. The interim order...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] ZAGPJHC 247
Parties
Appellant: Police and Prisons Civil Rights Union; Appellant: The General Secretary of POPCRU; Respondent: Ntombizakhe Theodora Mcaba
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 August 2014
Case Number
A5050/2013, 34814/2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Contempt of Court Finding
Outcome
Appeal upheld; order of contempt of court set aside.
Judges
Nicholls, Monama, Reyneke
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Interim Relief, Disciplinary Procedure, Natural Justice, Audi Alterem Partem
Civil Procedure Labour Law Contempt of Court Interim Relief Disciplinary Procedure Natural Justice Audi Alterem Partem

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Police and Prisons Civil Rights Union

Appellant

The General Secretary of POPCRU

Appellant

Ntombizakhe Theodora Mcaba

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Contempt of Court Finding

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants were in contempt of the court order granted by Moshidi J on 2 September 2011.
  2. 2 Whether the appeal to the National Disciplinary Committee (NDC) was heard in June 2011, thereby superseding the interim order.
  3. 3 Whether the appellants' non-compliance with the court order was wilful and mala fide.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appeal to the National Disciplinary Committee was indeed heard in June 2011, as evidenced by the appellants' consistent version and supporting documentation. The respondent did not dispute that the appeal had taken place, but rather challenged its procedural fairness. The interim order granted by Moshidi J was contingent upon the appeal being heard; since the appeal had occurred, the order was superseded. The appellants' non-compliance was not wilful or mala fide, but based on their belief that the appeal process had concluded. Accordingly, the requirements for contempt of court were not met, and the appeal succeeded.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; order of contempt of court set aside.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld with costs.
  • The order of contempt of court is set aside.