Sehloho and Others v Choice Foods (JS480/2008) [2018] ZALCJHB 172 (9 May 2018)

Sehloho and Others v Choice Foods (JS480/2008) [2018] ZALCJHB 172 (9 May 2018)

After considering the respondent's application for leave to appeal and the written submissions, the court found that the application was filed within the prescribed period as the respondent only received the judgment on 15 March 2018. However, upon careful consideration of the grounds for appeal, the court was not persuaded that any appeal would have a reasonable prospect of success. No other compelling reasons were presented to justify granting leave to appeal. The court also found no reason to make a costs order in respect of the application.

Citation
[2018] ZALCJHB 172
Parties
Applicant: Reuben Sehloho & Others; Respondent: Choice Foods
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
9 May 2018
Case Number
JS480/2008
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal After Judgment
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Judges
Coetzee
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Reasonable Prospect of Success, Costs Order, Superior Courts Act, Labour Relations Act
Labour Law Leave to Appeal Reasonable Prospect of Success Costs Order Superior Courts Act Labour Relations Act

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Reuben Sehloho & Others

Applicant

Choice Foods

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal After Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's application for leave to appeal was filed within the prescribed period.
  2. 2 Whether the grounds for leave to appeal demonstrate a reasonable prospect of success.
  3. 3 Whether there are compelling reasons to grant leave to appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

After considering the respondent's application for leave to appeal and the written submissions, the court found that the application was filed within the prescribed period as the respondent only received the judgment on 15 March 2018. However, upon careful consideration of the grounds for appeal, the court was not persuaded that any appeal would have a reasonable prospect of success. No other compelling reasons were presented to justify granting leave to appeal. The court also found no reason to make a costs order in respect of the application.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

Orders

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