Tsekedi v Masilonyana Local Municipality (J 571/2021) [2021] ZALCJHB 96 (4 June 2021)

Tsekedi v Masilonyana Local Municipality (J 571/2021) [2021] ZALCJHB 96 (4 June 2021)

The court found that the applicant's employment contract could only be terminated on grounds recognized by law or for breach of the code of conduct, as stipulated in the contract. The municipality relied solely on section 54A(3) of the Municipal Systems Act for termination, but this provision had been declared constitutionally invalid and was not in force at the relevant time. The respondents failed to address the invalidity of the statutory provision or provide any lawful grounds for termination. The applicant acted with due diligence and urgency in bringing the application, and the claim was contractual, not based on the Labour Relations Act. The court held that the termination...

Citation
[2021] ZALCJHB 96
Parties
Applicant: Pule Simon Tsekedi; Respondent: Masilonyana Local Municipality; Respondent: Acting Mayor: Clr X Nqwiliso N.O; Respondent: Speaker: Clr D E Modise N.O; Respondent: Mr N Sello N.O; Respondent: MEC for Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Free State Province; Respondent: Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs; Respondent: Mr K S Koalane
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
4 June 2021
Case Number
J 571/2021
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Final Judgment on Urgent Application for Declaratory and Reinstatement Order
Outcome
Application granted. The applicant's employment contract remains extant and he is reinstated as municipal manager with retrospective effect. Costs awarded against the first to third respondents.
Judges
Van Niekerk
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Breach of Employment Contract, Municipal Manager Appointment, Constitutional Invalidity, Urgency, Costs Follow Result
Labour Law Civil Procedure Specific Performance Breach of Employment Contract Municipal Manager Appointment Constitutional Invalidity Urgency Costs Follow Result

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pule Simon Tsekedi

Applicant

Masilonyana Local Municipality

Respondent

Acting Mayor: Clr X Nqwiliso N.O

Respondent

Speaker: Clr D E Modise N.O

Respondent

Mr N Sello N.O

Respondent

MEC for Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Free State Province

Respondent

Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs

Respondent

Mr K S Koalane

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Final Judgment on Urgent Application for Declaratory and Reinstatement Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the termination of the applicant's employment contract was lawful and valid.
  2. 2 Whether the municipality had authority to rescind the applicant's contract based on section 54A(3) of the Municipal Systems Act.
  3. 3 Whether the application was urgent and justified for final relief.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's employment contract could only be terminated on grounds recognized by law or for breach of the code of conduct, as stipulated in the contract. The municipality relied solely on section 54A(3) of the Municipal Systems Act for termination, but this provision had been declared constitutionally invalid and was not in force at the relevant time. The respondents failed to address the invalidity of the statutory provision or provide any lawful grounds for termination. The applicant acted with due diligence and urgency in bringing the application, and the claim was contractual, not based on the Labour Relations Act. The court held that the termination...

Court Disposition

Application granted. The applicant's employment contract remains extant and he is reinstated as municipal manager with retrospective effect. Costs awarded against the first to third respondents.

Orders

  • It is declared that the employment contract between the applicant and first respondent dated 26 January 2018 remains extant.
  • The first respondent is ordered to comply with the terms of the employment contract forthwith.