SACCAWU obo Dlamini v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR2281/21) [2024] ZALCJHB 240 (21 June 2024)
The court considered the requirements for granting leave to appeal as set out in section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act. After reviewing the written submissions of both parties and the main judgment, the court found that the third respondent failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] ZALCJHB 240
- Parties
- Applicant: SACCAWU o.b.o. Wonder Dlamini; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: David Sello N.O.; Respondent: Choppies Hebron
- Court
- Labour Court Johannesburg
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Case Number
- JR2281/21
- Procedural Posture
- Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment on Review
- Outcome
- Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
- Judges
- M Makhura
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Unfair Dismissal, Retrospective Reinstatement, Review of Arbitration Award
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
SACCAWU o.b.o. Wonder Dlamini
Applicant
Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration
Respondent
David Sello N.O.
Respondent
Choppies Hebron
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment on Review
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the application for leave to appeal meets the requirements of section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act.
- 2 Whether there are reasonable prospects of success on appeal regarding the findings on the merits and sanction.
- 3 Whether there are compelling reasons for the appeal to be heard.
Ratio Decidendi
The court considered the requirements for granting leave to appeal as set out in section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act. After reviewing the written submissions of both parties and the main judgment, the court found that the third respondent failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal. Furthermore, no compelling reasons were presented to justify the appeal being heard by a higher court. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed.
Court Disposition
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Orders
- The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
35 paragraphs
THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG
Not Reportable
Case No: JR2281/21
In the matter between:
SACCAWU o.b.o. WONDER DLAMINI
Applicant
and
COMMISSION FOR CONCILIATION,
MEDIATION AND ARBITRATION
First Respondent
DAVID SELLO N.O.
Second Respondent
CHOPPIES HEBRON
Third Respondent
Heard: In Chambers
Delivered: 21 June 2024
This judgment was handed down electronically by circulation to the parties’ legal representatives by email. The date for hand-down
is deemed to be 21 June 2024.
JUDGMENT:
APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL
MAKHURA, J
[1] On 29 April 2024, this Court handed down a judgment and order reviewing and setting aside an award, declaring the dismissal of the employee by the third respondent to be substantively unfair and ordering retrospective reinstatement. The third respondent now seeks leave to appeal the whole of this judgment and order. The application is opposed by the employee.
[2] The third respondent attacks the findings on the merit of the charge and the sanction. The test for applications for leave to appeal is set out under section 17(1) of the Superior Court Act.[1]
[3] Having considered the applicable test, the parties’ respective written submissions and the main judgment, I am not persuaded that the appeal would have reasonable prospects of success. There are no other compelling reasons for this matter to be heard by the appeal court. The application stands to be dismissed.
[4] In the premises, the following order is made:
Order:
1. The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.
M. Makhura
Judge of the Labour Court of South Africa
[1] Act 10 of 2013. Section 17(1) provides that: “Leave to appeal may only be given where the judge or judges concerned are of the opinion that – (a) (i) the appeal would have a reasonable prospect of success; or (ii) there is some other compelling reason why the appeal should be heard, including conflicting judgments on the matter under
consideration;…”
[1] Act 10 of 2013. Section 17(1) provides that: “Leave to appeal may only be given where the judge or judges concerned are of the opinion that –
(a) (i) the appeal would have a reasonable prospect of success; or
(ii) there is some other compelling reason why the appeal should be heard, including conflicting judgments on the matter under
consideration;…”