FCCDTAWU obo Mathiba v Clover SA (Pty) Ltd (J2834/2000) [2001] ZALC 145 (14 September 2001)

Sneller Verbatim/MS
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
BRAAMFONTEIN CASE NO: J2834/2000
2001-09-14
In the matter between
FCCDTAWU obo MATHIBA Applicant
and
CLOVER SA (PTY) LTD Respondent
________________________________________________________________
J U D G M E N T
Delivered on 14 September 2001
________________________________________________________________
REVELAS, J:
1.The   applicant   has   referred   a   matter   to   this   court   regarding   the  
respondent's   alleged   refusal   to   pay   him   his   severance   pay   following   a  
dismissal ostensibly for the operational requirements of the respondent.  
The   applicant   does   not,   and   his   representative   assured   me,   attack   the  
fairness or otherwise of his dismissal.
2.What   was   referred   to   the   CCMA,   and   this   still   is   the   case,   is   that   the  
applicant has a dispute with the respondent solely about the payment of  
severance pay.  
3.In terms of section 196 which has been repealed, the Labour Court did not  
have   the   necessary   jurisdiction   to   entertain   disputes   surrounding   the  
isolated question of the non­payment of severance pay.  
4.However section 196 of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1996 (the Act) was  
replaced   by   section   41(10)   of   the   Basic   Conditions   of   Employment   Act

which reads the same as section 196(10) of the LRA.  In order words this  
court still does not have the necessary jurisdiction to hear the matter  
and the matter should have been arbitrated by the CCMA.
5.The applicant's representative informed me from the bar that he was advised  
by the official of the CCMA that the CCMA does not have the necessary  
jurisdiction   to   entertain   the   matter   and   that   the   matter   had   to   be  
referred to the Labour Court.  I considered this fact and whether or not  
the applicant should pay the respondent's costs in this matter.  
6.However I decline to make a cost order against the applicant in this matter  
and make the following order:
1. The Labour Court does not have the necessary jurisdiction to entertain  
the question of the non­payment of severance pay in this matter.
2. The matter is referred to the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and  
Arbitration to arbitrate the issue which has already been conciliated.  
(The   Commissioner   of   the   CCMA   are   referred   to   section   41(10)   of   the  
Basic Conditions of Employment Act.)
________________
E. Revelas