About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: Johannesburg Labour Court, Johannesburg
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: Johannesburg Labour Court, Johannesburg
>>
2020
>>
[2020] ZALCJHB 176
|
|
Paramount Advanced Technologies (Pty) Ltd v Barrier and Others (JR 2561/2017) [2020] ZALCJHB 176 (10 June 2020)
THE
LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG
Not reportable
Case no: JR 2561/2017
In the matter between:
PARAMOUNT
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES (PTY) LTD
Applicant
and
PATRICK
ALAIN HENDRI BARRIER
First
Respondent
MMERSHAN
NAIDOO N.O
Second Respondent
THE COMMISSION FOR
CONCILIATION,
MEDIATION
AND ARBITRATION
Third Respondent
Decided: In Chambers
Delivered: 10 June
2020
In
view of the measures implemented as a result of the Covid-19
outbreak, this judgment was handed down electronically by circulation
to the parties' representatives by email. The date for hand-down is
deemed to be 10 June 2020.
JUDGMENT: APPLICATION
FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL
PRINSLOO, J.
[1]
The First Respondent filed an application
for leave to appeal against the whole of the judgment and order of
this Court handed down
on 6 March 2020.
[2]
The application for leave to appeal is
opposed by the Applicant.
[3]
I have considered the grounds for appeal as
raised by the First Respondent as well as the written submissions
filed in support thereof.
I also considered the submissions filed in
opposition of the application.
[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
. Appeals should be limited to
matters where there is a reasonable prospect that the factual matrix
could receive a different treatment
or where there is some legitimate
dispute on the law.
[5]
Section
17(1)(a)(ii) of the Superior Courts Act
[1]
provides that leave to appeal may be granted if there is a compelling
reason why the appeal should be heard.
In
casu,
important questions of law are raised and there is a legitimate
dispute on the law that should be decided and that requires the
appeal to be heard.
In
my view, a novel point is raised and this is a case where the appeal
should be heard.
[6]
I therefore make the following order:
Order
1.
Leave to appeal is granted.
2.
There is no order as to costs.
______________
Connie Prinsloo
Judge
of the Labour Court of South Africa
[1]
Act
10 of 2013.