Reuben v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (343/09, 344/09) [2010] ZALC 105; (2010) 31 ILJ 2980 (LC) (22 June 2010)

Reuben v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (343/09, 344/09) [2010] ZALC 105; (2010) 31 ILJ 2980 (LC) (22 June 2010)

The court found that both claims brought by the applicant arose from the same employment relationship and facts, justifying consolidation. The respondent’s delay in filing its answering affidavit was adequately explained and did not prejudice the applicant, warranting condonation. The applicant’s travel claim lacked merit, as the respondent had already paid amounts not owed, supporting the respondent’s counter-claim. The claim for employment particulars was unfounded, as the applicant already possessed the relevant information. The conduct of the applicant’s attorneys was vexatious and aimed at generating costs, justifying an adverse costs order de boniis propriis. The court dismissed the...

Citation
[2010] ZALC 105
Parties
Applicant: Solane Matoto Reuben; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 June 2010
Case Number
J343/09 and 344/09
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Amended Ex Tempore Reasons for Order
Outcome
The applicant’s consolidated claims are dismissed. The respondent’s counter-claim succeeds. Costs de boniis propriis are awarded against the applicant’s former attorneys.
Judges
Bhoola
Legal Topics
Basic Conditions of Employment Act, Condonation, Costs De Boniis Propriis, Consolidation of Claims, Travel Expenses, Particulars of Employment
Labour Law Basic Conditions of Employment Act Condonation Costs De Boniis Propriis Consolidation of Claims Travel Expenses Particulars of Employment

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Solane Matoto Reuben

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Amended Ex Tempore Reasons for Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to payment of travel expenses under section 77 of the BCEA.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to an order compelling the respondent to provide employment particulars under section 31 read with section 78(1)(e) of the BCEA.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent is entitled to recover travel claims paid in error via counter-claim.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that both claims brought by the applicant arose from the same employment relationship and facts, justifying consolidation. The respondent’s delay in filing its answering affidavit was adequately explained and did not prejudice the applicant, warranting condonation. The applicant’s travel claim lacked merit, as the respondent had already paid amounts not owed, supporting the respondent’s counter-claim. The claim for employment particulars was unfounded, as the applicant already possessed the relevant information. The conduct of the applicant’s attorneys was vexatious and aimed at generating costs, justifying an adverse costs order de boniis propriis. The court dismissed the...

Court Disposition

The applicant’s consolidated claims are dismissed. The respondent’s counter-claim succeeds. Costs de boniis propriis are awarded against the applicant’s former attorneys.

Orders

  • The application for consolidation is granted.
  • Condonation is granted for the late filing of the respondent’s answering affidavit.