Serobe v Eskom Holdings Soc Ltd and Others (JR2529/13) [2017] ZALCJHB 360 (20 September 2017)

Serobe v Eskom Holdings Soc Ltd and Others (JR2529/13) [2017] ZALCJHB 360 (20 September 2017)

The court found that the applicant's grounds for leave to appeal were inconsistent and lacked a rational basis. The applicant proceeded with the review application on the merits despite alleging procedural irregularities. The ex tempore judgment was based on the absence of a nexus between the facts presented at arbitration and the grounds of review. Without such a nexus, the review could not succeed. The court was not convinced that another court would reach a different conclusion or that there were reasonable prospects of success on appeal. Accordingly, leave to appeal was refused.

Citation
[2017] ZALCJHB 360
Parties
Applicant: Simon Serobe; Respondent: Eskom Holdings Soc Ltd; Respondent: Joseph Wilson Thee N.O.; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation & Arbitration
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 September 2017
Case Number
JR2529/13
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Ex Tempore Judgment on Review
Outcome
Leave to appeal is refused; the application is dismissed with costs awarded against the applicant.
Judges
Y Saloojee
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Review Application, Reasonable Prospects of Success, Costs Order
Labour Law Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Review Application Reasonable Prospects of Success Costs Order

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

Simon Serobe

Applicant

Eskom Holdings Soc Ltd

Respondent

Joseph Wilson Thee N.O.

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation & Arbitration

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Ex Tempore Judgment on Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has reasonable prospects of success on appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the court failed to act in accordance with a previous order.
  3. 3 Whether the court erred in its findings on the merits of the review application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's grounds for leave to appeal were inconsistent and lacked a rational basis. The applicant proceeded with the review application on the merits despite alleging procedural irregularities. The ex tempore judgment was based on the absence of a nexus between the facts presented at arbitration and the grounds of review. Without such a nexus, the review could not succeed. The court was not convinced that another court would reach a different conclusion or that there were reasonable prospects of success on appeal. Accordingly, leave to appeal was refused.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal is refused; the application is dismissed with costs awarded against the applicant.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the first respondent's costs.