South Africa Case Law

Roering NO and Another v Mahlangu and Others (581/2015)

Roering NO and Another v Mahlangu and Others (581/2015) [2016] ZASCA 79; [2016] 3 All SA 466 (SCA); 2016 (5) SA 455 (SCA) (30 May 2016)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

581/2015

Judges

Wallis, Willis, Saldulker, Zondi, Tsoka

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the summons issued to Ms Mahlangu to attend the liquidation enquiry did not constitute an abuse of process. The liquidators had legitimate reasons to seek her testimony, as she possessed relevant information regarding the Department's dealings with 3P Consulting, which was the principal asset of the company in liquidation. The overlap between the issues canvassed at the enquiry and those in pending litigation was not, by itself, sufficient to infer abuse. The statutory purpose of the enquiry under ss 417 and 418 of the Companies Act 61 of 1973 includes en…

Source excerpt

• Liquidation Enquiry
• Abuse Of Process
• Summons To Attend
• Companies Act 1973
• Review Of Commissioner Decision

Makaringe v Ledwaba and Others (JR2726/12)

Makaringe v Ledwaba and Others (JR2726/12) [2015] ZALCJHB 432 (11 December 2015)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR2726/12

Judge

M Mthombeni

The Labour Court granted condonation for a late review, found the rescission ruling irregular, and set it aside in an unopposed matter.

• Condonation For Late Filing
• Rescission Of Arbitration Award
• Unfair Dismissal
• Review Of Commissioner Decision
• Condonation-for-late-filing
• Rescission

Lavangee v National Bargaining Council For The Chemical Indusrty and Others (DA13/12)

Lavangee v National Bargaining Council For The Chemical Indusrty and Others (DA13/12) [2014] ZALAC 20 (30 May 2014)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

DA13/12

Judges

Tlaletsi, Dlodlo, Mokgoatlheng

The Labour Appeal Court held that the commissioner erred by narrowly interpreting section 144 of the Labour Relations Act and failing to consider whether the appellant had shown good cause for rescission. The binding precedent in Shoprite Checkers requires that good cause be considered as a ground for rescission, which includes evaluating the reasonableness and bona fide nature of the explanation for default and the existence of a prima facie defence. The appellant provided a reasonable and unchallenged explanation for his absence, and the third respondent did not dispute the factual averment…

Source excerpt

• Rescission Of Arbitration Award
• Good Cause Requirement
• Default Award
• Unfair Dismissal
• Review Of Commissioner Decision

OOSTHUIZEN v IMPERIAL LOGISTICS CC (JA74/2012 & JA75/2012)

OOSTHUIZEN v IMPERIAL LOGISTICS CC (JA74/2012 & JA75/2012) [2014] ZALAC 106 (21 March 2014)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

JA74/2012 & JA75/2012

Judges

Waglay, Dlodlo, Musi

The Labour Appeal Court held that the unsigned referral form was a material defect that deprived the bargaining council of jurisdiction to entertain the dispute. The appellant's subsequent conduct did not amount to ratification, as conciliation had not taken place and there was no tacit acceptance by the council. The delay in filing a proper referral and condonation application was excessive, and the explanation provided was unsatisfactory and did not cover the entire period. The commissioner properly exercised his discretion in refusing condonation, and the court a quo was correct in dismiss…

Source excerpt

• Condonation Application
• Jurisdictional Facts
• Unsigned Referral Form
• Unfair Dismissal
• Review Of Commissioner Decision

Seardel Group Trading (Pty) Ltd t/a Berg River Textiles v South African Clothing and Textile Workers Union (SACTWU) and Others (C592/2011)

Seardel Group Trading (Pty) Ltd t/a Berg River Textiles v South African Clothing and Textile Workers Union (SACTWU) and Others (C592/2011) [2012] ZALCCT 14 (14 March 2012)

Court

Labour Court Cape Town

Case number

C592/2011

Judge

Steenkamp

The Labour Court held that a certificate of outcome issued by a CCMA commissioner is not a ruling but merely a record that the dispute remains unresolved. It does not confer jurisdiction or entitle parties to strike or arbitrate, nor is it subject to review under section 158(1)(g) of the LRA. The applicant's argument that the commissioner committed a gross irregularity by categorising the dispute as one of mutual interest was rejected. The Court followed Bombardier Transportation, confirming that the certificate of outcome has no legal significance beyond recording the unresolved status of th…

Source excerpt

• Collective Agreements
• Certificate Of Outcome
• Review Of Commissioner Decision
• Strike Action
• Jurisdiction Of Ccma

Westmead Carriers CC v Geviseer NO and Others (JR924/05)

Westmead Carriers CC v Geviseer NO and Others (JR924/05) [2011] ZALCJHB 153 (10 November 2011)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR924/05

Judge

K M Savage

The applicant failed to provide substantive evidence of reasonable prospects of success in its rescission application, offering only a bald assertion without details. The commissioner was justified in finding that the applicant did not explain the unavailability of its personnel and did not file corroborating affidavits. The commissioner acted within his powers and in accordance with the Labour Relations Act and the bargaining council's rules, determining the application on the papers as permitted. The requirements of fairness and expedition were appropriately balanced, and there was no infri…

Source excerpt

• Rescission Of Arbitration Award
• Review Of Commissioner Decision
• Prospects Of Success
• Audi Alteram Partem
• Costs Award

Kentz Engineering (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation Mediation And Arbitration and Others (JR597/2010)

Kentz Engineering (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation Mediation And Arbitration and Others (JR597/2010) [2010] ZALCJHB 52 (19 October 2010)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR597/2010

Judge

AC Basson

The court found that the commissioner erred in law by failing to consider the condonation application before issuing the certificate of outcome. Section 10(2) of the Employment Equity Act prescribes a six-month time limit for referring discrimination disputes to the CCMA, and condonation is a jurisdictional requirement if the referral is late. The commissioner incorrectly indicated that condonation was 'not applicable' despite the referral being more than ten years out of time and a condonation application having been filed. This error deprived the CCMA of jurisdiction and constituted a revie…

Source excerpt

• Condonation
• Jurisdiction Of Ccma
• Unfair Discrimination
• Employment Equity Act
• Review Of Commissioner Decision

Gold Fields Mining South Africa (Pty) Ltd (Kloof Gold Mine) v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR 2006/08)

Gold Fields Mining South Africa (Pty) Ltd (Kloof Gold Mine) v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR 2006/08) [2009] ZALC 66; (2010) 31 ILJ 371 (LC) ; [2009] 12 BLLR 1214 (LC) (3 July 2009)

Court

Labour Court

Case number

JR 2006/08

Judge

Van Niekerk

The Labour Court held that the certificate of outcome issued by the CCMA commissioner is merely a record of whether the dispute referred for conciliation has been resolved or remains unresolved. The certificate does not constitute a jurisdictional ruling regarding the nature of the dispute or the appropriate forum for further proceedings. The referring party's categorisation of the reason for dismissal determines whether the dispute proceeds to arbitration or adjudication, not the commissioner's description in the certificate. The commissioner is not required to make a jurisdictional ruling a…

Source excerpt

• Unfair Dismissal
• Jurisdiction Of Ccma
• Certificate Of Outcome
• Review Of Commissioner Decision

Spanjaard Ltd v Olivier and Others (C77/2006)

Spanjaard Ltd v Olivier and Others (C77/2006) [2007] ZALCJHB 2 (27 June 2007)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

C77/2006

Judge

Francis

The court held that the commissioner’s reliance on Labour Court authority, specifically Shoprite Checkers (Pty) Ltd v CCMA & others, was correct and not reviewable. The Labour Relations Act does not require 'good cause' for rescission applications under section 144, and previous judgments introducing such a requirement were based on an incorrect application of common law principles to statutory bodies. The applicant’s jurisdictional objections and explanations for absence were not sufficient to warrant rescission, and the commissioner was not obliged to address jurisdiction in the rescission…

Source excerpt

• Rescission Of Award
• Good Cause Requirement
• Jurisdiction Of Ccma
• Review Of Commissioner Decision

Northern Training Trust v Maake and Others (JR268/02)

Northern Training Trust v Maake and Others (JR268/02) [2005] ZALCJHB 5 (2 December 2005)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR268/02

Judge

Cele AJ

The commissioner failed to consider all relevant facts and evidence in determining whether the applicant was properly notified of the arbitration hearing. He placed undue emphasis on the fax transmission report and did not address the applicant's explanation for non-attendance or its prospects of success. This constituted a gross irregularity and a failure to apply the correct principles for rescission. The decision was not rationally connected to the material before the commissioner and is therefore reviewable. Both the rescission ruling and the arbitration award were set aside, and the matt…

Source excerpt

• Rescission Of Arbitration Award
• Service Of Process
• Review Of Commissioner Decision
• Procedural Fairness
• Employment Status