About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: Durban Labour Court, Durban
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: Durban Labour Court, Durban
>>
2010
>>
[2010] ZALCD 11
|
|
South African Revenue Services v Commission for Conciliation Mediation And Arbitration and Others (D393/07) [2010] ZALCD 11 (30 December 2010)
IN
THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
HELD
IN DURBAN
Not
Reportable
Case
NO: D393/07
In
the matter between:
SOUTH
AFRICAN REVENUE SERVICES
APPLICANT
and
COMMISSION
FOR CONCILIATION, MEDIATION
AND
ARBITRATION
FIRST RESPONDENT
COMMISSIONER
PAUL SHABANGU
SECOND RESPONDENT
PSA obo
CHATROOGHOON
THIRD
RESPONDENT
Date of Hearing:1
5 September 2010
Date
of Judgment: 30 December 2010
JUDGMENT
CELE
J
Introduction
[1]
In terms of section 166 of the Labour Relations Act,
[1]
(“the Act”) the applicant seeks leave to appeal against a
final decision of this Court in this matter dated 30 December
2010.
This court had dismissed applicant`s application to review and
set aside an arbitration award dated 13 May 2007 issued
in this
matter by the second respondent. The applicant was ordered to
pay costs of the review application. The third
respondent has
opposed this application on behalf of its member, Mr Chartrooghoon
who is the erstwhile employee of the applicant.
[2] The question is
whether the applicant has shown that there are reasonable prospects
of success on appeal. Put different,
the enquiry turns on
whether there are reasonable prospects of another court concluding
differently on the issues raised.
[3]
I have considered the grounds of appeal outlined by the applicant in
contending that two of the findings made by this Court
were arrived
at by the adoption of a wrong approach to a collective agreement
governing the employment relationship between the
parties. There
is also the legal challenge to whether or not the decision in
County
Fair Foods (PTY) Ltd v CCMA
[2]
was
correctly applied in this matter.
[4] Notwithstanding the
contrary submissions made by the third respondent in opposing this
application, I am of the view that there
is a reasonable prospect of
success on appeal.
[5] The application for
leave to appeal is accordingly granted. Costs shall be costs in the
appeal.
_____________________
Cele
J
APPEARANCES
For
theApplicant:
Advocate Tim Bruinders SC
Instructed
by Routledge Modise INC
For
the Respondent
Mr B Macgregor of Macgregor Erasmus
[1]
66 of 1995.
[2]
(2003)
241 ILJ 355 (LAC).