THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG
Case No. JS584/17
In the matter between:
KENNETH MABUNDA Applicant
and
SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC SOUTH AFRICA (PTY) LTD First Respondent
KIM NAIDOO Second Respondent
Heard: In Chambers
Delivered: 14 September 2026
JUDGMENT: APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL
MAKHURA, J
[1] On 27 May 2026, this Court delivered an ex tempore judgment dismissing the
applicant’s contempt application and made no order as to costs. The applicant
has subsequently sought leave to appeal against that judgment.
(1) Reportable: No
(2) Of interest to other Judges: No
(3) Revised: No
____________ 14 September 2026
Signature Date
2
[2] The applicant s ought an order holding the respondents in contempt of an
arbitration award in terms of which he was deemed to be employed by the first
respondent and reinstated into its employ. On 15 November 2017, under case
number JS584/17, the applicant and the first respondent concluded a settlement
agreement providing for his retrospective reinstatement with effect from 1
December 2016.
[3] There is no dispute that the applicant was reinstated by the first respondent
pursuant to the settlement agreement , which had overtaken the award. The
applicant continued working for the first respondent until his transfer to Bollore
Logistics with effect from 1 January 2021. Given the first respondent’s
compliance with the award and, importantly , the settlement agreement , the
contempt application is devoid of merit.
[4] In the ex tempore judgment delivered on 27 May 2026, I cautioned the applicant
that his application was frivolous, constituted an abuse of the Court’s processes,
and exposed him to the risk of a punitive costs order. I did not, however, make a
costs order because the respondents did not persist in seeking costs .
Notwithstanding that warning, the applicant has proceeded with an application for
leave to appeal.
[5] The respondents now seek the dismissal of the application together with a
punitive costs order. In my view, this is a matter that justifies not only a departure
from the ordinary costs principle applicable in this Court, but also an award of
costs on the attorney and client scale.
[6] In the premises, the following order is made:
Order
1. The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
2. The applicant is ordered to pay the respondents’ costs on an attorney and
client scale.
3
____________________
M. Makhura
Judge of the Labour Court of South Africa