Strydom v Pauline Binfa and Associates CC t/a PBA Brokers (JR92/21) [2024] ZALCJHB 409 (10 October 2024)

Strydom v Pauline Binfa and Associates CC t/a PBA Brokers (JR92/21) [2024] ZALCJHB 409 (10 October 2024)

The Court found that the order of 24 November 2021 was erroneously granted as it reflected an agreement between the parties that did not exist. The absence of actual consensus, coupled with procedural irregularities and the omission of key issues such as the R10,000.00 unlawful deduction and procedural fairness, rendered the order susceptible to rescission. The Court determined that these matters were not properly ventilated in the review application and that Ms Strydom was deprived of an opportunity to oppose the review due to misleading advice from her union. The interests of justice required that the order be rescinded to allow for proper adjudication of all relevant issues.

Citation
[2024] ZALCJHB 409
Parties
Applicant: Sanette Magdalena Susanna Strydom; Respondent: Paulina Binfa & Associates CC t/a PBA Brokers
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 October 2024
Case Number
JR92/21
Procedural Posture
Rescission Application / Judgment
Outcome
The rescission application is granted; the Court Order of 24 November 2021 is rescinded.
Judges
Ntsoane
Legal Topics
Rescission of Judgment, Unfair Dismissal, Default Award, Condonation, Procedural Irregularity
Labour Law Civil Procedure Rescission of Judgment Unfair Dismissal Default Award Condonation Procedural Irregularity

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sanette Magdalena Susanna Strydom

Applicant

Paulina Binfa & Associates CC t/a PBA Brokers

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Rescission Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court Order dated 24 November 2021 should be rescinded due to the absence of agreement between the parties.
  2. 2 Whether procedural irregularities in the review application justify rescission of the order.
  3. 3 Whether the omission of the R10,000.00 unlawful deduction and procedural aspects from the review application affects the validity of the order.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the order of 24 November 2021 was erroneously granted as it reflected an agreement between the parties that did not exist. The absence of actual consensus, coupled with procedural irregularities and the omission of key issues such as the R10,000.00 unlawful deduction and procedural fairness, rendered the order susceptible to rescission. The Court determined that these matters were not properly ventilated in the review application and that Ms Strydom was deprived of an opportunity to oppose the review due to misleading advice from her union. The interests of justice required that the order be rescinded to allow for proper adjudication of all relevant issues.

Court Disposition

The rescission application is granted; the Court Order of 24 November 2021 is rescinded.

Orders

  • The Court Order of Justice Nkutha-Nkontwana of 24 November 2021 is hereby rescinded.
  • The Applicant (Ms Strydom) is directed to file her answering affidavit to the review application within ten days of this order and the Respondent (PBA Brokers) must file its replying affidavit five days thereafter.