Zondo and Others v St Martins School (J3020/12, JS68/2014, J1026/12) [2017] ZALCJHB 330 (13 September 2017)

Zondo and Others v St Martins School (J3020/12, JS68/2014, J1026/12) [2017] ZALCJHB 330 (13 September 2017)

The court found that the applicants had not demonstrated any reasonable prospect of success on appeal. The grounds advanced were either previously addressed in the judgment or lacked substance. The alleged replacement of the ex tempore judgment with a written version was permissible and did not constitute a valid ground of appeal. The applicants had not followed the procedural requirements under section 189A of the Labour Relations Act, and their challenge to the limitation on disputing procedural unfairness was without merit. The application for leave to appeal was therefore dismissed.

Citation
[2017] ZALCJHB 330
Parties
Applicant: Zondo N & 7 Others; Respondent: St Martins School
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 September 2017
Case Number
J3020/12, JS68/2014, J1026/12
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment and Order
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Judges
Coetzee
Legal Topics
Automatic Unfair Dismissal, Retrenchment Procedure, Leave to Appeal, Absolution From Instance
Labour Law Civil Procedure Automatic Unfair Dismissal Retrenchment Procedure Leave to Appeal Absolution From Instance

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Zondo N & 7 Others

Applicant

St Martins School

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment and Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to leave to appeal against the orders of 15 May 2017 and 18 May 2017.
  2. 2 Whether the court erred in limiting the applicants to disputing only the substantive fairness of their alleged automatically unfair retrenchment.
  3. 3 Whether the court erred in granting absolution from the instance regarding the claim for payment of money.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants had not demonstrated any reasonable prospect of success on appeal. The grounds advanced were either previously addressed in the judgment or lacked substance. The alleged replacement of the ex tempore judgment with a written version was permissible and did not constitute a valid ground of appeal. The applicants had not followed the procedural requirements under section 189A of the Labour Relations Act, and their challenge to the limitation on disputing procedural unfairness was without merit. The application for leave to appeal was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • There is no order as to costs.