Solidarity and Others v Department of Correctional Services and Others (C834/2015) [2017] ZALCCT 6 (3 February 2017)

Solidarity and Others v Department of Correctional Services and Others (C834/2015) [2017] ZALCCT 6 (3 February 2017)

The court found that the applicants' reasoning was flawed, as the execution of the Labour Court judgment was suspended upon the noting of the appeal to the Constitutional Court. The interim order granted under Rule 49(11) had lapsed once the Labour Appeal Court finalised the appeal. Therefore, the National Commissioner could not be held in contempt for failing to implement the order during the pendency of the appeal. The contempt application was deemed ill-conceived, and the court saw no reason why costs should not follow the result.

Citation
[2017] ZALCCT 6
Parties
Applicant: Solidarity; Applicant: PJ Davids; Applicant: CF February; Applicant: AJ Jonkers; Applicant: LJ Fortuin; Applicant: GM Baartman; Applicant: DS Merkeur; Applicant: TS Abrahams; Applicant: DR Jordaan; Applicant: JJ Kotze; Applicant: DMA Wehr; Respondent: Department of Correctional Services; Respondent: Minister of Correctional Services; Respondent: National Commissioner of the Department of Correctional Services; Respondent: Minister of Labour
Court
Labour Court Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
3 February 2017
Case Number
C834/2015
Procedural Posture
Contempt Application / Return Day of Ex Parte Contempt Application After Constitutional Court Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
Rabkin-Naicker
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Employment Equity Targets, Execution of Judgments, Appeal Suspension, Costs Order
Labour Law Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Employment Equity Targets Execution of Judgments Appeal Suspension 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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Solidarity

Applicant

PJ Davids

Applicant

CF February

Applicant

AJ Jonkers

Applicant

LJ Fortuin

Applicant

GM Baartman

Applicant

DS Merkeur

Applicant

TS Abrahams

Applicant

DR Jordaan

Applicant

JJ Kotze

Applicant

DMA Wehr

Applicant

Department of Correctional Services

Respondent

Minister of Correctional Services

Respondent

National Commissioner of the Department of Correctional Services

Respondent

Minister of Labour

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Contempt Application / Return Day of Ex Parte Contempt Application After Constitutional Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the National Commissioner was in contempt of the Labour Court order dated 18 October 2013.
  2. 2 Whether the obligation to implement employment equity targets considering regional demographics persisted pending appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the execution of the Labour Court judgment was suspended by the noting of an appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants' reasoning was flawed, as the execution of the Labour Court judgment was suspended upon the noting of the appeal to the Constitutional Court. The interim order granted under Rule 49(11) had lapsed once the Labour Appeal Court finalised the appeal. Therefore, the National Commissioner could not be held in contempt for failing to implement the order during the pendency of the appeal. The contempt application was deemed ill-conceived, and the court saw no reason why costs should not follow the result.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.