SA Solidarity obo Booi and Others v Technistrut (Pty) Ltd t/a Selati Roofs (JS381/12) [2015] ZALCJHB 212 (15 July 2015)

SA Solidarity obo Booi and Others v Technistrut (Pty) Ltd t/a Selati Roofs (JS381/12) [2015] ZALCJHB 212 (15 July 2015)

The court found that the applicants failed to provide a sufficiently full explanation of the circumstances under which the concessions in the pre-trial minute were made and why they sought withdrawal at this stage. The timing of the application, raised only during cross-examination and not prior to trial, undermined their bona fides. The court held that the binding nature of the pre-trial minute and the prejudice to the respondent outweighed the applicants' arguments. Justice and fairness did not justify granting the amendment, and the applicants had not established special circumstances for the court to exercise its discretion in their favour.

Citation
[2015] ZALCJHB 212
Parties
Applicant: SA Solidarity obo MT Booi & 22 Others; Respondent: Technistrut (Pty) Ltd t/a Selati Roofs
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 July 2015
Case Number
JS381/12
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Application to Amend Pre Trial Minute During Trial
Outcome
Application to amend or strike out paragraphs 3.23 and 3.24 of the signed pre-trial minute is dismissed.
Judges
Tlhotlhalemaje
Legal Topics
Withdrawal of Admission, Pre Trial Minute, Amendment of Pleadings, Special Circumstances, Prejudice, Strike Action
Labour Law Civil Procedure Withdrawal of Admission Pre Trial Minute Amendment of Pleadings Special Circumstances Prejudice Strike Action

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SA Solidarity obo MT Booi & 22 Others

Applicant

Technistrut (Pty) Ltd t/a Selati Roofs

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Application to Amend Pre Trial Minute During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have established special circumstances to justify amendment or striking out of paragraphs 3.23 and 3.24 of the signed pre-trial minute.
  2. 2 Whether the timing and explanation for the withdrawal of admissions in the pre-trial minute are sufficient.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent would be prejudiced by the proposed amendment.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to provide a sufficiently full explanation of the circumstances under which the concessions in the pre-trial minute were made and why they sought withdrawal at this stage. The timing of the application, raised only during cross-examination and not prior to trial, undermined their bona fides. The court held that the binding nature of the pre-trial minute and the prejudice to the respondent outweighed the applicants' arguments. Justice and fairness did not justify granting the amendment, and the applicants had not established special circumstances for the court to exercise its discretion in their favour.

Court Disposition

Application to amend or strike out paragraphs 3.23 and 3.24 of the signed pre-trial minute is dismissed.

Orders

  • The application to amend, or strike out paragraphs 3.23 and 3.24 of parties’ signed pre-trial minute is dismissed.
  • The matter remains part-heard and the Registrar of the Court is to set it down for continuance.