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 326
|
|
Phahlane and Another v Emfuleni Local Municipality (J2024/17) [2017] ZALCJHB 326 (12 September 2017)
IN
THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG
Not
Reportable
Case no: J 2024/17
In
the matter between:
LEHLOHONOLO
VINCENT PHAHLANE
First
Applicant
ERIC
MICHAEL MOLOTO
Second
Applicant
and
EMFULENI
LOCAL MUNICIPALITY
Respondent
Heard:
12 September 2017
Delivered:
12 September 2017
EX TEMPORE
JUDGMENT
WHITCHER
J
[1]
This urgent application is dismissed for the reasons that follow.
[2]
The applicants did not address why this matter is urgent.
[3]
Although the applicant’s use words such as unlawful, invalid
and void, they have failed to plead a specific provision
of a
collective agreement and attach same which gives rise to a case based
on unlawfulness. They only attempted to do so at the
hearing, which
is not permitted. In any event, the applicability of the collective
agreement they referred to is in doubt considering
the decision of
the Labour Court in the
City
of Cape Town v Independent Municipal and Allied Workers Union and
Others
.
[1]
[4]
Moreover where they say the suspension is invalid because it is for
invalid reasons, they simply motivate why in their view
their
suspension is
unfair
and
refer the court to the LRA, the Code of Good Practice and legal
principles relevant to the fairness or otherwise of a suspension.
The
application, read as a whole demonstrate that they complain that the
suspension is procedurally and substantively unfair.
[5]
In this regard they have an alternative recourse (alternative
remedy), namely a referral of an unfair labour practice to the
relevant bargaining council. This court is not a court of first
instance regarding the fairness of a suspension and has no
jurisdiction
over unfair labour practices.
[6]
The applicants do not state why they would not be afforded
appropriate redress in filing an unfair labour practice with the
relevant bargaining council.
[7]
The application also does not address whether the applicant’s
will suffer irreparable harm and if so what harm they will
suffer if
this application is not granted. This is relevant considering the
precautionary suspension is on full pay and by its
nature is of a
limited duration.
Order:
[8] The application is
dismissed with no order as to costs
__________________________
B
Whitcher
Judge
of the Labour Court of South Africa
APPEARANCES:
For the
Applicants:
M Petlane and M Mokgatle
Instructed
by:
Sihunu Attorneys
For the
Respondent:
W Mokhari SC
Instructed by:
Werkmans Attorneys
[1]
[2015] ZALCCT 58;
[2015] 12 BLLR 1197
(LC); (2016) 37 ILJ 147 (LC), dated 17 September
2015.