Vision Integrated Workers Union and Others v Sandton Plant Hire (Pty) Ltd (JS360/19) [2021] ZALCJHB 369 (18 October 2021)

Vision Integrated Workers Union and Others v Sandton Plant Hire (Pty) Ltd (JS360/19) [2021] ZALCJHB 369 (18 October 2021)

The court found that the respondent failed to present persuasive grounds indicating reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The grounds for leave to appeal were considered against the applicable test and the judgment in the main action. The court was not satisfied that another court would come to a different conclusion regarding the findings of procedural and substantive unfairness in the dismissals. Accordingly, leave to appeal was refused.

Citation
[2021] ZALCJHB 369
Parties
Applicant: Vision Integrated Workers Union; Applicant: William Modiba; Applicant: Joseph Masina; Applicant: The Dismissed Employees of Sandton Plant Hire (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Sandton Plant Hire (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 October 2021
Case Number
JS360/19
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment in Main Action
Outcome
Leave to appeal is refused.
Judges
S Mabaso
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Compensation for Unfair Dismissal, Reinstatement, Leave to Appeal
Labour Law Unfair Dismissal Compensation for Unfair Dismissal Reinstatement Leave to Appeal

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vision Integrated Workers Union

Applicant

William Modiba

Applicant

Joseph Masina

Applicant

The Dismissed Employees of Sandton Plant Hire (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Sandton Plant Hire (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment in Main Action

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent has shown reasonable prospects of success on appeal against the judgment finding dismissals procedurally and substantively unfair.
  2. 2 Whether leave to appeal should be granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent failed to present persuasive grounds indicating reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The grounds for leave to appeal were considered against the applicable test and the judgment in the main action. The court was not satisfied that another court would come to a different conclusion regarding the findings of procedural and substantive unfairness in the dismissals. Accordingly, leave to appeal was refused.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal is refused.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal is refused.
  • No order as to costs.