Security Services Employers' Organisation (SSEO) and Others v South African Transport and Allied Workers' Union (SATAWU) and Others (JA 28/06) [2006] ZALAC 3 (11 May 2006)

Security Services Employers' Organisation (SSEO) and Others v South African Transport and Allied Workers' Union (SATAWU) and Others (JA 28/06) [2006] ZALAC 3 (11 May 2006)

The Labour Appeal Court held that SATAWU was not bound by the April 1 wage agreement, as it had not signed the agreement nor initialled the handwritten amendment to the bargaining council constitution. The appellants' case in the founding affidavit was based solely on the allegation that SATAWU had agreed to the amendment, which was refuted by SATAWU's evidence. The attempt by the appellants to introduce a new case based on SATAWU's conduct at meetings was impermissible and prejudicial, as it was not the case SATAWU was called upon to answer. The Court found that SATAWU's conduct did not amount to acquiescence or estoppel, and that the evidence showed SATAWU insisted on retaining clause 6...

Citation
[2006] ZALAC 3
Parties
Appellant: Security Services Employers' Organisation (SSEO); Appellant: South African National Security Employers' Association (SANSEA); Appellant: South African Intruder Detection Services Association (SAIDSA); Appellant: Western Cape Security Association (WESCA); Appellant: Security Industry Association of South Africa (SIASA); Respondent: South African Transport and Allied Workers' Union (SATAWU); Respondent: Those persons whose names are listed in Annexure 'A' to the Notice of Motion
Court
Labour Appeal Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 May 2006
Case Number
JA 28/06
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Court Judgment Discharging Rule Nisi
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Zondo JP, Jappie AJA, Musi AJA
Legal Topics
Collective Bargaining, Strike Action, Interpretation of Collective Agreements, Estoppel, Representation in Bargaining Councils
Labour Law Civil Procedure Collective Bargaining Strike Action Interpretation of Collective Agreements Estoppel Representation in Bargaining Councils

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Security Services Employers' Organisation (SSEO)

Appellant

South African National Security Employers' Association (SANSEA)

Appellant

South African Intruder Detection Services Association (SAIDSA)

Appellant

Western Cape Security Association (WESCA)

Appellant

Security Industry Association of South Africa (SIASA)

Appellant

South African Transport and Allied Workers' Union (SATAWU)

Respondent

Those persons whose names are listed in Annexure 'A' to the Notice of Motion

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Court Judgment Discharging Rule Nisi

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether SATAWU was bound by the April 1 wage agreement despite not signing it.
  2. 2 Whether SATAWU acquiesced to the amendment to the bargaining council constitution.
  3. 3 Whether the Labour Court correctly discharged the rule nisi and dismissed the application.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Appeal Court held that SATAWU was not bound by the April 1 wage agreement, as it had not signed the agreement nor initialled the handwritten amendment to the bargaining council constitution. The appellants' case in the founding affidavit was based solely on the allegation that SATAWU had agreed to the amendment, which was refuted by SATAWU's evidence. The attempt by the appellants to introduce a new case based on SATAWU's conduct at meetings was impermissible and prejudicial, as it was not the case SATAWU was called upon to answer. The Court found that SATAWU's conduct did not amount to acquiescence or estoppel, and that the evidence showed SATAWU insisted on retaining clause 6...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.