Rampusi and Others v Maluti A Phufung Local Municipality and Another (J853/2022) [2023] ZALCJHB 167 (31 May 2023)

Rampusi and Others v Maluti A Phufung Local Municipality and Another (J853/2022) [2023] ZALCJHB 167 (31 May 2023)

The court found that the applicant failed to satisfy the stringent test for leave to appeal. The grounds for appeal did not demonstrate a reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion, nor did they raise any novel or unique legal issues or legitimate disputes on the law. The principles governing section 189A(13) of the Labour Relations Act are established and binding, and the applicant's submissions reflected a poor understanding of the legal position. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed.

Citation
[2023] ZALCJHB 167
Parties
Applicant: Tshele Rozania Rampusi and 218 Others; Respondent: Maluti A Phufung Local Municipality; Respondent: Gilbert Mokotso N O
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
31 May 2023
Case Number
J853/2022
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Final Judgment
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with no order as to costs.
Judges
Prinsloo
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Reasonable Prospect of Success, Section 189a13 Lra, Binding Precedent
Labour Law Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Reasonable Prospect of Success Section 189a13 Lra Binding Precedent

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tshele Rozania Rampusi and 218 Others

Applicant

Maluti A Phufung Local Municipality

Respondent

Gilbert Mokotso N O

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has demonstrated reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different conclusion.
  2. 2 Whether there is a legitimate dispute on the law or factual matrix warranting leave to appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the grounds for appeal raise novel or unique legal issues.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to satisfy the stringent test for leave to appeal. The grounds for appeal did not demonstrate a reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion, nor did they raise any novel or unique legal issues or legitimate disputes on the law. The principles governing section 189A(13) of the Labour Relations Act are established and binding, and the applicant's submissions reflected a poor understanding of the legal position. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with no order as to costs.

Orders

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