Republican Press (Pty) Ltd v CEPPWAWU and Others (218/06) [2007] ZASCA 121; 2008 (1) SA 404 (SCA); [2007] 11 BLLR 1001 (SCA); (2007) 28 ILJ 2503 (SCA) (27 September 2007)

Republican Press (Pty) Ltd v CEPPWAWU and Others (218/06) [2007] ZASCA 121; 2008 (1) SA 404 (SCA); [2007] 11 BLLR 1001 (SCA); (2007) 28 ILJ 2503 (SCA) (27 September 2007)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that it was competent to hear the appeal directly from the Labour Court after the Labour Appeal Court refused leave to appeal. The court found that the Labour Court's order for reinstatement with retrospective effect exceeding 12 months was legally competent, as the limitation in section 194 of the Labour Relations Act applies only to compensation, not to back-pay arising from reinstatement. However, the court determined that the six-year delay in prosecuting the claim, attributable to the union's lack of diligence, rendered reinstatement impracticable. The court concluded that compensation equivalent to 12 months’ remuneration was the only appropriate...

Citation
[2007] ZASCA 121
Parties
Appellant: Republican Press (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: CEPPWAWU & Gumede and Others
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
27 September 2007
Case Number
218/06
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Court After Labour Appeal Court Refused Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Appeal upheld; reinstatement order set aside and replaced with compensation.
Judges
Farlam, Nugent, Jafta, Mlambo, Maya
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Reinstatement, Compensation, Selection Criteria, Delay in Prosecution
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Reinstatement Compensation Selection Criteria Delay in Prosecution

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Republican Press (Pty) Ltd

Appellant

CEPPWAWU & Gumede and Others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Court After Labour Appeal Court Refused Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Supreme Court of Appeal is competent to hear an appeal directly from the Labour Court when the Labour Appeal Court has refused leave to appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the Labour Court was legally entitled to order reinstatement of dismissed employees with retrospective effect exceeding 12 months.
  3. 3 Whether it was appropriate to order reinstatement after a six-year delay caused by the union's lack of diligence.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that it was competent to hear the appeal directly from the Labour Court after the Labour Appeal Court refused leave to appeal. The court found that the Labour Court's order for reinstatement with retrospective effect exceeding 12 months was legally competent, as the limitation in section 194 of the Labour Relations Act applies only to compensation, not to back-pay arising from reinstatement. However, the court determined that the six-year delay in prosecuting the claim, attributable to the union's lack of diligence, rendered reinstatement impracticable. The court concluded that compensation equivalent to 12 months’ remuneration was the only appropriate...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; reinstatement order set aside and replaced with compensation.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal against paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Labour Court order is granted.
  • The appeal is upheld; paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Labour Court order are set aside.