Volschenk and Another v Morero and Others (J 2247-2010) [2010] ZALC 167; [2011] 3 BLLR 313 (LC) ; (2011) 32 ILJ 983 (LC) (10 November 2010)

Volschenk and Another v Morero and Others (J 2247-2010) [2010] ZALC 167; [2011] 3 BLLR 313 (LC) ; (2011) 32 ILJ 983 (LC) (10 November 2010)

The court found that the applicants failed to establish a prima facie right to legal representation in the disciplinary enquiry. The disciplinary code allowed representation by union officials, whose expertise could be substantial, and the applicants did not provide objective reasons for their lack of confidence in such representation. The complexity of the matter and the seriousness of the charges did not, in themselves, necessitate legal representation, as the applicants were experienced in the relevant procedures and could adequately defend themselves. The possibility of expert evidence or criminal charges did not justify interim relief at this stage. The court held that the prejudice...

Citation
[2010] ZALC 167
Parties
Applicant: Volschenk, B; Applicant: Van der Westhuizen, E. F; Respondent: Morero, Sello Dada N.O.; Respondent: The City of Johannesburg; Respondent: City Power Johannesburg (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 November 2010
Case Number
J 2247-2010
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Interim Interdict to Stay Disciplinary Proceedings Pending Review
Outcome
Application for interim relief refused.
Judges
Lagrange
Legal Topics
Legal Representation in Disciplinary Enquiry, Interim Relief, Balance of Convenience, Prima Facie Right, Irreparable Harm
Labour Law Civil Procedure Legal Representation in Disciplinary Enquiry Interim Relief Balance of Convenience Prima Facie Right Irreparable Harm

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Volschenk, B

Applicant

Van der Westhuizen, E. F

Applicant

Morero, Sello Dada N.O.

Respondent

The City of Johannesburg

Respondent

City Power Johannesburg (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Interim Interdict to Stay Disciplinary Proceedings Pending Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to legal representation in the disciplinary enquiry.
  2. 2 Whether the chairperson exercised his discretion correctly in refusing legal representation.
  3. 3 Whether interim relief suspending the enquiry pending review is justified.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to establish a prima facie right to legal representation in the disciplinary enquiry. The disciplinary code allowed representation by union officials, whose expertise could be substantial, and the applicants did not provide objective reasons for their lack of confidence in such representation. The complexity of the matter and the seriousness of the charges did not, in themselves, necessitate legal representation, as the applicants were experienced in the relevant procedures and could adequately defend themselves. The possibility of expert evidence or criminal charges did not justify interim relief at this stage. The court held that the prejudice...

Court Disposition

Application for interim relief refused.

Orders

  • The application for interim relief suspending the disciplinary enquiry pending the outcome of a review of the chairperson's ruling refusing legal representation is refused.
  • No order as to costs.