About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: Johannesburg Labour Court, Johannesburg
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: Johannesburg Labour Court, Johannesburg
>>
2014
>>
[2014] ZALCJHB 112
|
|
Mmagory and Others v Davis and Others (JR1078/09) [2014] ZALCJHB 112 (12 March 2014)
REPUBLIC
OF SOUTH AFRICA
INTHE LABOUR COURTOF
SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG
JUDGMENT
Not
Reportable
CASE
NO: JR 1078/09
In
the matter between:
MMAGORY
JACOBS First
Applicant
JAFTHA
SONIA Second
Applicant
LINKS
IRENE Third
Applicant
And
DAVIS
LEVY First
Respondent
METAL
AND ENGENEEERING INDUSTRIES
BARGAINING
COUNCIL Second
Respondent
BETA
SCAN
ELECTRONICS Third
Respondent
STINGER
ELECTRONICS Fourth
Respondent
Delivered:
12 March 2014
JUDGMENT:
LEAVE TO APPEAL
MOLAHLEHI J
[1]
This
is an application for leave to appeal against the judgement of this
Court made on 5 July 2013 in terms of which the arbitration
award
made under case number MGA 7135, dated February 2009, was reviewed
and set aside. The dismissal of the applicants was found
to have been
unfair and substituted with an order to the effect that the dismissal
of the applicants was substantively unfair.
[2]
The
background facts are set out in the judgment of the Court a quo and
therefore there is no need to repeat the same herein. The
applicant
has raised several grounds of appeal. It is not necessary in my view
to repeat the same in this judgment. In determining
whether there is
a basis to interfere with the arbitration award the Court applied the
reasonable decision maker test set out in
Sidumo and Another v
Rustenburg Platinum Ltd and Others,
[1]
where it was held that the power to determine whether the dismissal
of the employee was fair rests with the Commissioner
and not the
employer.
[3]
In
considering this leave to appeal I have taken into account the
well-established test of reasonable prospects of success on appeal.
The question in this regard being whether there are reasonable
prospects that another Court is likely to arrive at a different
conclusion to that of the Court a quo if leave to appeal was to be
granted. The leave to appeal may also be granted where there
are
compelling reasons to do so or if there are competing judgments on
the issue/s determined by the Court
a
quo.
[4]
In
my view, considering the grounds for leave to appeal and the
submissions made the applicant together with the judgment of the
Court a
quo
I
am not persuaded that the applicant has made a case warranting the
granting of leave to appeal.
In
other words there are no reasonable prospects that another Court is
likely to arrive at a decision different to the one reached
by this
Court.
Order
[5]
In
the premises, leave to appeal to the Labour Appeal Court is
dismissed.
E Molahlehi
Judge
of the labour court of South Africa
Appearances:
Matter
considered in Chambers
[1]
2008
(2) BLLR 158
(CC).