Applicant was employed by the respondent as a line worker. Following allegations of misconduct, applicant was charged with misconduct. It was alleged that applicant had been apprehended by members of the public stealing property belonging to the respondent. Applicant was brought before a Disciplinary Committee which convicted him and recommended his dismissal. Applicant appealed against the decision in terms of the respondent’s Code of Conduct. This appeal was unsuccessful. Applicant subsequently filed an appeal with this court on 30 March 2015. This appeal was withdrawn on 22 February 2016. Applicant alleges that the appeal was erroneously filed and in its... More
This is an application for condonation of late noting of an appeal. The facts are that the applicant was charged and found guilty of acts of misconduct. He was charged in terms of the National Employment Code of Conduct S.I. 15/2006. He was found guilty. His appeal at the workplace failed. The respondent advised him that if he was not in agreement with the outcome he could take his matter to a labour officer. He did so. Thereafter the labour officer made his draft ruling and applied to have it confirmed by the Labour Court. The application for confirmation was... More
This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court in terms of section 92 F (2) of the Labour Act as read with Rule 43 of the Labour Court Rules, 2017. Both parties raised preliminary issues at the commencement of the proceedings and the Court reserved judgment stating that it would furnish its reasons. More
It is essential to relate the facts in some detail. Applicant is an engineer by qualification who was employed by the Third Respondent as a Director of Engineering Services. Applicant was suspended from employment in February 2021 on allegations that the quality and quantity of water had deteriorated. Charges were preferred against the Applicant and he was brought before a Disciplinary Committee which found him guilty and recommended his dismissal. Applicant’s appeal did not meet the desired result. More
On the 10th of October 2020, the Appellant entered into a 5-year employment contract with the Respondent as an Assistant Project Manager. The contract was supposed to subsist from 10th October 2020 to 30th September 2025. On the 6th of February 2023, the Appellant received a letter of termination of his employment contract from the Respondent. The letter gave the Appellant only two weeks’ notice. On 23rd March 2023, the Appellant through his legal practitioners, wrote in response to the Respondent. He indicated that the notice period was unlawful as it fell short of the 3 months demanded by the... More
