Woolworths (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1326/12) [2016] ZALCJHB 383 (6 October 2016)

Woolworths (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1326/12) [2016] ZALCJHB 383 (6 October 2016)

The court granted leave to appeal against its earlier review judgment and costs order, acknowledging that the Constitutional Court was considering the prescription issue and that its decision could affect the correctness of the Labour Appeal Court's interpretation. The court found that there was a reasonable prospect that another court might reach a different conclusion on the costs award, given its discretionary nature. The court did not find merit in the challenge to the admission of the supplementary affidavit but allowed the appeal on both the prescription and costs issues in light of the pending Constitutional Court decision.

Citation
[2016] ZALCJHB 383
Parties
Applicant: Woolworths (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Commissioner Lerato Sikwane N.O; Respondent: Reuben Lucas Podile
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
6 October 2016
Case Number
JR1326/12
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Review Judgment
Outcome
Leave to appeal is granted against the review judgment and the costs order.
Judges
Lagrange
Legal Topics
Prescription Act Application, Arbitration Award Prescription, Costs Award Discretion, Review Application Procedure
Labour Law Civil Procedure Prescription Act Application Arbitration Award Prescription Costs Award Discretion Review Application Procedure

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Woolworths (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Commissioner Lerato Sikwane N.O

Respondent

Reuben Lucas Podile

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Review Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitration award had prescribed under the Prescription Act.
  2. 2 Whether the costs order made in the review application was correct.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant was properly allowed to file a supplementary affidavit in support of its prescription plea.

Ratio Decidendi

The court granted leave to appeal against its earlier review judgment and costs order, acknowledging that the Constitutional Court was considering the prescription issue and that its decision could affect the correctness of the Labour Appeal Court's interpretation. The court found that there was a reasonable prospect that another court might reach a different conclusion on the costs award, given its discretionary nature. The court did not find merit in the challenge to the admission of the supplementary affidavit but allowed the appeal on both the prescription and costs issues in light of the pending Constitutional Court decision.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal is granted against the review judgment and the costs order.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal is granted against the judgment in the review application handed down on 18 May 2016 and against the costs order.
  • Costs of the appeal shall be costs in the cause.