Tshongweni v Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality (JA 47/2010) [2012] ZALAC 17; (2012) 33 ILJ 2847 (LAC) (15 June 2012)

Tshongweni v Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality (JA 47/2010) [2012] ZALAC 17; (2012) 33 ILJ 2847 (LAC) (15 June 2012)

The Labour Appeal Court held that the respondent failed to establish substantive fairness in the dismissal of the appellant. The only witness for the respondent admitted to having no personal knowledge of the appellant's conduct, and no evidence was presented to show that delegation of procurement responsibilities was improper or in breach of policy. The appellant was not entitled to reinstatement as he did not wish to resume employment and had obtained alternative employment. Compensation equivalent to nine months remuneration was appropriate, reflecting the unexpired period of the fixed term contract. The Labour Court erred in its costs order, as the offer made by the respondent did not...

Citation
[2012] ZALAC 17
Parties
Appellant: Mongezi Tshongweni; Respondent: Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality
Court
Labour Appeal Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 June 2012
Case Number
JA 47/2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Court Judgment; Cross Appeal and Condonation Application
Outcome
Appeal partially succeeds on costs; application for condonation of cross appeal dismissed; compensation award upheld; costs order varied.
Judges
JR Murphy, P Tlaletsi, M Molemela
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Fixed Term Contracts, Remedies for Unfair Dismissal, Compensation, Reinstatement, Costs Award
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Fixed Term Contracts Remedies for Unfair Dismissal Compensation Reinstatement Costs Award

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mongezi Tshongweni

Appellant

Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Court Judgment; Cross Appeal and Condonation Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the dismissal of the appellant was substantively unfair.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant is entitled to reinstatement or compensation under the LRA.
  3. 3 Whether the Labour Court erred in its award of costs.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Appeal Court held that the respondent failed to establish substantive fairness in the dismissal of the appellant. The only witness for the respondent admitted to having no personal knowledge of the appellant's conduct, and no evidence was presented to show that delegation of procurement responsibilities was improper or in breach of policy. The appellant was not entitled to reinstatement as he did not wish to resume employment and had obtained alternative employment. Compensation equivalent to nine months remuneration was appropriate, reflecting the unexpired period of the fixed term contract. The Labour Court erred in its costs order, as the offer made by the respondent did not...

Court Disposition

Appeal partially succeeds on costs; application for condonation of cross appeal dismissed; compensation award upheld; costs order varied.

Orders

  • The application for condonation of the late delivery of the notice of cross appeal is dismissed with costs.
  • The appeal partially succeeds only in respect of the award of costs; the orders of the Labour Court are varied as follows: (1) The dismissal of the applicant was substantively unfair. (2) The applicant is awarded compensation equivalent to nine months remuneration to be calculated at the rate of remuneration earned...