Solidarity obo Strydom & 5 Others v State Information Technology Agency SOC Ltd (C 148/18; JS 49/18; JS 67/18 JS 68/18; JS 338/18; JS 195/18) [2022] ZALCJHB 237 (12 August 2022)

Solidarity obo Strydom & 5 Others v State Information Technology Agency SOC Ltd (C 148/18; JS 49/18; JS 67/18 JS 68/18; JS 338/18; JS 195/18) [2022] ZALCJHB 237 (12 August 2022)

The court found that the applicants failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The reliance on both normal retirement age and agreed retirement age was legally unsustainable, as these concepts are mutually exclusive under section 187(1)(b) of the Labour Relations Act. The grounds of appeal were comprehensively addressed in the original judgment, and there was no rational basis to conclude that another court would reach a different decision. Accordingly, leave to appeal was refused. The court also determined that awarding costs against the applicants would be contrary to the principles of law and fairness, and thus made no order as to costs.

Citation
[2022] ZALCJHB 237
Parties
Applicant: Solidarity obo Gerhardus Viljoen Strydom & 5 Others; Respondent: State Information Technology Agency SOC Ltd
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 August 2022
Case Number
C 148/18; JS 49/18; JS 67/18; JS 68/18; JS 338/18; JS 195/18
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with no order as to costs.
Judges
Nkutha-Nkontwana
Legal Topics
Retirement Age, Dismissal on Retirement, Section 187 1 B, Normal Vs Agreed Retirement Age
Labour Law Retirement Age Dismissal on Retirement Section 187 1 B Normal Vs Agreed Retirement Age

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Solidarity obo Gerhardus Viljoen Strydom & 5 Others

Applicant

State Information Technology Agency SOC Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have reasonable prospects of success on appeal against the judgment dismissing their claims.
  2. 2 Whether reliance on both normal retirement age and agreed retirement age is legally sustainable under section 187(1)(b) of the LRA.
  3. 3 Whether costs should be awarded against the applicants in the leave to appeal application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The reliance on both normal retirement age and agreed retirement age was legally unsustainable, as these concepts are mutually exclusive under section 187(1)(b) of the Labour Relations Act. The grounds of appeal were comprehensively addressed in the original judgment, and there was no rational basis to conclude that another court would reach a different decision. Accordingly, leave to appeal was refused. The court also determined that awarding costs against the applicants would be contrary to the principles of law and fairness, and thus made no order as to costs.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with no order as to costs.

Orders

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