Xulu v Zen Garden Chinese Restaurant and Another (J 830/08) [2013] ZALCJHB 177 (31 July 2013)
The court is satisfied that the respondents are aware of the previous order dated 3 December 2008 and have not complied with it. The second respondent, as owner of the first respondent, is ordered to show cause why he should not be found guilty of contempt of court for failing to comply. The court grants the second...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] ZALCJHB 177
- Parties
- Applicant: Xolani Xulu; Respondent: Zen Garden Chinese Restaurant; Respondent: Mr Yaoquan Zhong (also known as ‘Clork’)
- Court
- Labour Court Johannesburg
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Case Number
- J 830/08
- Procedural Posture
- Contempt Application / Ex Parte Order
- Outcome
- Order to show cause issued against the second respondent regarding contempt of court for non-compliance with a previous order.
- Judges
- R Lagrange
- Legal Topics
- Contempt of Court, Compliance With Court Orders
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Xolani Xulu
Applicant
Zen Garden Chinese Restaurant
Respondent
Mr Yaoquan Zhong (also known as ‘Clork’)
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Contempt Application / Ex Parte Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the second respondent has failed to comply with the court order dated 3 December 2008.
- 2 Whether the second respondent should be found guilty of contempt of court for non-compliance.
Ratio Decidendi
The court is satisfied that the respondents are aware of the previous order dated 3 December 2008 and have not complied with it. The second respondent, as owner of the first respondent, is ordered to show cause why he should not be found guilty of contempt of court for failing to comply. The court grants the second respondent an opportunity to explain the non-compliance by affidavit or in person at the hearing. Failure to provide a satisfactory explanation or to appear may result in a finding of contempt and the imposition of incarceration or a fine.
Court Disposition
Order to show cause issued against the second respondent regarding contempt of court for non-compliance with a previous order.
Orders
- The second respondent must show cause on 30 August 2013 at 10h00 why he should not be found guilty of contempt of court for failing to comply with the order dated 3 December 2008.
- The second respondent may explain the non-compliance by affidavit on or before the hearing date, but must still appear in court.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
Not Reportable
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA,
IN JOHANNESBURG
JUDGMENT
Case no: J 830/08
In the matter between:
XOLANI XULU Applicant and ZEN GARDEN CHINESE RESTAURANT First Respondent MR YAOQUAN ZHONG (also known as ‘Clork’) Second Respondent
Heard: 31 July 2013
Delivered: 31 July 2013
EX PARTE JUDGMENT
LAGRANGE, J (In chambers)
Having considered the matter I am satisfied the respondent and second respondent are aware of the court order in this matter dated 03 December 2008, and the make the following order;
Order
IT IS ORDERED THAT -
The second respondent as the owner of the first respondent must show cause on 30 August 2013 at 10h00 why he should not be found guilty of contempt of court for failing to comply with the order of this court in the same matter dated 3 December 2008.
The second respondent may explain its conduct and that of the first respondent for not complying with the said order by way of affidavit on the date of hearing or before that date. The filing of such affidavit does not excuse the second respondent from being present in court on 30 August 2013.
In the absence of providing an explanation to the satisfaction of the court, or failing to appear in court despite been properly
served, the second respondent may be found guilty of contempt and be incarcerated for such period as the court deems appropriate or be fined in an amount the court deems appropriate.
The applicant must ensure that service of this order is effected personally upon the second respondent.
_______________________
R LAGRANGE, J (In chambers)
Judge of the Labour Court of South Africa