About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: Johannesburg Labour Court, Johannesburg
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: Johannesburg Labour Court, Johannesburg
>>
2015
>>
[2015] ZALCJHB 112
|
|
Solidarity obo Parkinson v Damelin (Pty) Ltd and Others (JR2792/12) [2015] ZALCJHB 112 (31 March 2015)
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH
AFRICA
THE LABOUR COURT OF
SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG
JUDGMENT
Case no. JR2792/12
DATE: 31 MARCH 2015
Not Reportable
In the matter between:
SOLIDARITY obo S W
PARKINSON
....................................................................................
Applicant
And
DAMELIN (PTY)
LTD
................................................................................................
First
Respondent
COMMISSIONER SIBONGISENI
SITHOLE
.....................................................
Second
Respondent
COMMISSION FOR CONCILIATION
MEDIATION
AND
ARBITRATION
.................................................................................................
Third
Respondent
Date: 31 March 2015
JUDGMENT –
APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL
BLEAZARD, AJ
[1] I have considered the Applicant’s
Leave to Appeal, the Applicant’s written submissions in support
of the Applicant’s
Application for Leave to Appeal and the
First Respondent’s submissions opposing the Application for
Leave to Appeal.
[2] At the outset I must state that I
referred in my Judgment to the fact that there were two grounds upon
which an Award of the
Commissioner could be set aside
(See: Paragraph 3 of the Judgment).
[3] On re-reading my Judgment for the
purpose of this Application, I am aware that it fails to take account
of the constraint placed
on the ‘process related’ (or
‘latent irregularity’) ground by the Judgment of Herholdt
v Nedbank Ltd (Congress
of SA Trade Unions as Amicus Curiae) (2013)
34 ILJ 2795 (SCA) at paragraphs 20 – 21.
[4] I have also considered that another
Court may come to a different conclusion to the one which I came,
inter alia, in respect
of the status of the disciplinary code of the
First Respondent, its obligation to act in accordance therewith and
the Second Respondent’s
finding in relation thereto, including
the interpretation to be placed on the letter of 25 January 2012, and
the consequences that
flow therefrom, and whether or not the Second
Respondent’s finding in regard thereto was reasonable.
[5] In the circumstances, I make the
following Order:
5.1. Application for Leave to Appeal to
the Labour Appeal Court is granted;
5.2. Costs of the Application for Leave
to Appeal shall be costs in the Appeal.
Bleazard, AJ
Acting Judge of the Labour Court
APPEARANCES:
For the Applicant:
Instructed by: Solidarity
For the First Respondent: Advocate
Nel
Instructed by: