Vermaak and Another v Sea Spirit Trading 162 CC t/a Paledi Super Spar and Others (JS964/2015) [2017] ZALCJHB 109 (23 March 2017)

45 Reportability

Brief Summary

Appeal — Application for leave to appeal — Third Respondent seeking leave to appeal against judgment of Labour Court — Unopposed application with comprehensive written submissions — Court must assess reasonable prospects of success and the potential for a different conclusion by another court — Leave to appeal granted based on reasonable prospects and the presence of an important question of law.

About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: Johannesburg Labour Court, Johannesburg
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: Johannesburg Labour Court, Johannesburg
>>
2017
>>
[2017] ZALCJHB 109
|

|

Vermaak and Another v Sea Spirit Trading 162 CC t/a Paledi Super Spar and Others (JS964/2015) [2017] ZALCJHB 109 (23 March 2017)

THE
LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
JOHANNESBURG
Not reportable
Case no: JS 964/2015
In the matter between:
CORNELIUS MARTHINUS
VERMAAK

First Applicant
MARLENE DAPHNE
VERMAAK

Second Applicant
and
SEA
SPIRIT TRADING 162 CC t/a PALEDI SUPER SPAR
First Respondent
GREENVILLE
TRADING 543 CC t/a PALEDI TOPS
Second
Respondent
THE
SPAR GROUP LIMITED t/a PALEDI SUPER SPAR
Third Respondent
Decided:
In Chambers
Judgment:
23 March 2017
JUDGMENT: APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO
APPEAL
PRINSLOO J.
[1]
The
Third Respondent filed an application for leave to appeal against the
whole of the judgment of this Court handed down on 31
January 2017.
[2]
The
application for leave to appeal is unopposed and the Third Respondent
filed comprehensive written submissions.
[3]
I
have considered the six grounds for appeal as raised by the Third
Respondent as well as the submissions made in support thereof
and I
do not intend to repeat those herein.
[4]
It is
trite that in order to be entitled to leave to appeal, an applicant
in the application for leave to appeal must satisfy this
Court that
it has reasonable prospects of success on appeal and that based on
the facts and the law another court could arrive
at a conclusion
different than the one reached by the Court
a
quo
.
[5]
Suffice
to say that after due consideration of the application for leave to
appeal, I am persuaded that there is a reasonable prospect
that
another court could arrive at a different conclusion than the one
arrived at by this Court. Furthermore, I am also of the
view that
there is an important question of law that should be decided and that
requires the appeal to be heard.
Order
[6]
I
therefore make the following order:
6.1 Leave to appeal
is granted.
6.2 Costs to be
costs in the appeal.
______________
C.
Prinsloo
Judge
of the Labour Court