Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union v Samancor Chrome Limited (Application for Leave to Appeal) (2022/046427) [2026] ZAGPJHC 260 (12 March 2026)

45 Reportability
Civil Procedure

Brief Summary

Appeal — Leave to appeal — Application for leave to appeal against dismissal of application — Applicant failing to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal — Court finding no grounds for departure from previous judgment — Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA



IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG

Case Number: 2022-046427



In the matter between:


In the matter between:

ASSOCIATION OF MINEWORKERS AND APPLICANT
CONSTRUCTION UNION

And

SAMANCOR CHROME LIMITED RESPONDENT
(REG:1926/08883/06)


JUDGMENT
APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL


(1) REPORTABLE: YES / NO
(2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO
(3) REVISED: YES/NO
______________ _________________________
DATE SIGNATURE

JOHANN GAUTSCHI AJ
[1] The applicant ( AMCU) seeks leave to appeal against the dismissal of its
application.
[2] AMCU’s first ground of appeal is that I erred in distinguishing the judgments in
Caxton, Industrial Health Resources Group and Baleni. My judgment gave
reasons for finding that AMCU ’s reliance on those judgments does not support
its case. This ground of appeal raises nothing new which was not already
considered in my judgment and has not, in my view, provided any sound reason
for a departure from those reasons.
[3] The second and related third grounds of appeal are that I erred in finding that the
requirements for mandatory interdict were not met because AMCU has an
appropriate alternative remedy provided by PAIA and that, in the circumstances,
given the third- party interests involved, it was mandatory for AMCU to use the
remedies provided by PAIA. Here again, this was all dealt with in my judgment
and, in my view, AMCU has provided no sound reason to depart from those
findings.
[4] In the circumstances I am of the view that there are no reasonable prospects of
success on appeal and consequently the application for leave to appeal must be
dismissed with costs.
ORDER:
[1] The Applicant’s application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
[2] The Applicant is to pay the costs of the Respondent including the costs of two
counsel, costs to be taxed on scale C.


___________________________
Johann Gautschi AJ
ACTING JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT
JOHANNESBURG

For Applicant: ADV M MBIKWA
ADV N SOEKOE
Instructed by: RICHARD SPOOR ATTORNEYS
(011482 6081)

For Respondent: ADV B ROUX SC
ADV E KROMHOUT
Instructed by: CLIFFE DEKKER HOFMEYER INC
(011 562 1042)

Hearing date: 4 August 2025

Judgment date: 12 March 2026