Court : South Africa Supreme Court of Appeal
on appeal from:labour appeal court, johannesburg (ndlovu, tlaletsi and landman jja sitting as court of appeal): 1. the appeal succeeds with costs. 2. the order of the labour appeal court is set aside and replaced with the following: 1. the appeal succeeds with costs. 2. the order of the labour court is set aside and replaced with the following: (a) the second and further applicants dismissal is unfair in terms of s 188(1) of the labour relations act 66 of 1995. (b) the respondent is ordered to pay the second and further applicants 12 months compensation calculated at their rate of remuneration on the date of dismissal. (c) the respondent is ordered to pay the costs of the application.? judgment maya ja (malan, shongwe, pillay and saldulker jja concurring): [1] this matter, which has been pending for over a decade,1starkly illustrates how the provisions of s 198 of the labour relations act 66 of 1995 (the act)2may operate as a stratagem to avoid an employers obligations and circumvent the protections afforded an employee under the labour legislation against unfair dismissal. [2] the crisp issue on appeal is whether the second and further appellants (the employees)3were unfairly dismissed by the respondent, a temporary employment service provider or labour broker (abancedisi), when they were (a) excluded from the premises of its client to which they were assigned and replaced with new workers; (b) thereafter not reassigned work elsewhere; and (c) not paid wages thereafter. the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : South Africa Supreme Court of Appeal
..... gusha v road accident fund 2012 (2) sa 371 (sca) para 7. 9. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : South Africa Supreme Court of Appeal
on appeal from: north gauteng high court, pretoria (kollapen aj sitting as court of first instance): the appeal is dismissed. judgment van der merwe aja (mthiyane ap, theron and petse jja and zondi aja concurring): [1] the issue in this appeal is whether this court should interfere with the sanction for contempt of court imposed in respect of the first respondent by kollapen aj in the north gauteng high court, pretoria. the judgment of the court a quo is reported as gf v sh and others 2011 (3) sa 25 (gnp). it granted leave to appeal to this court. [2] the second and third respondents have no interest in the appeal. the first respondent (the respondent) does, but did not participate in the hearing of the appeal. the appellant rightly did not persist in an attempt to place further evidence before this court. [3] the issue arose in the following manner. the appellant and the first respondent (the parties) were married to each other on 21 march 1992. two children were born of the marriage, namely a boy born on 26 february 1995 and a girl born on 27 september 1997. however, the marriage did not last. on 27 august 2002 the marriage between the parties was dissolved by order of the high court. an agreement of settlement between the parties was also made an order of court. in terms of the agreement of settlement custody of the minor children was awarded to the appellant, subject to the right of reasonable access to the children of the respondent, who was the plaintiff in the action. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : South Africa Supreme Court of Appeal
on appeal from:north west high court, mafikeng (leeuw jp and landman j sitting as court of appeal): 1. the appeal succeeds to the limited extent set out in 2 below. 2. the order of the court a quo is set aside and is substituted with the following: the appeal is struck off the roll. judgment leach ja (navsa, tshiqi and saldulker jja and swain aja concurring) [1] the appellant seeks to appeal to this court against a sentence of life imprisonment imposed upon him by a regional magistrate for raping two young girls. an appeal to the high court against his sentence was dismissed on 4 june 2012, as was a subsequent application to that court for leave to appeal further. an application to this court resulted in the appellant being granted the necessary leave. [2] the two counts of rape on which the appellant was convicted arose out of an incident which occurred at his home near matseng village on 9 october 2009. the states case was that the appellant, who was in his mid-forties at the time, enticed the two complainants, girls who were both but 12 years of age, to enter his home by offering them money. once they were inside his house, the appellant locked them in, switched off the light and proceeded to rape them in turn. in order to attempt to escape the consequences of this terrible deed, the appellant told the complainants that he would kill them if they reported what he had done. [3] the appellant pleaded not guilty and denied that these events ever took place, but was convicted .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : South Africa Supreme Court of Appeal
on appeal from the western cape high court, cape town (rogers j sitting as court of first instance). save for setting aside paragraphs (b) and (c) of the order of the court below, and substituting them with the order that follows, the appeal is dismissed with costs, to be paid by the first to third appellants jointly and severally, and to include the costs of two counsel. paragraphs (b) and (c) are substituted with the following: in the event that a decision as to the future of the cape town refugee reception office has not been made by 30 november 2013, the applicants are granted leave to apply upon the same papers, supplemented so far as they consider that to be necessary, for further relief. judgment nugent ja (lewis, theron and wallis jja concurring) [1] many people stream into this country, generally through its northern borders, claiming refuge from oppression and turmoil in their own countries. the refugees act 130 of 1998 provides the framework within which south africa carries out its international obligation to receive refugees. [2] it provides in s 8(1) that the director-general of the department of home affairs may establish as many refugee reception offices in the republic as he or she, after consultation with the standing committee, regards as necessary for the purposes of this act. each refugee reception office must consist of at least one refugee reception officer and one refugee status determination officer. [3] applications for refugee status called asylum .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : South Africa Supreme Court of Appeal
on appeal from: eastern cape high court, grahamstown (makaula and griffiths jj sitting as court of appeal): the appeal is upheld with costs. the order of the high court is set aside and replaced with the following: the appeal is dismissed with costs. judgment cachalia ja (leach, majiedt, petse and willis jja concurring): [1] the close corporations act 69 of 1984 (the act) permits a deregistered close corporation to have its registration restored. when that occurs, s 26(7) of the act says that the corporation shall continue to exist and be deemed to have continued in existence as from the date of deregistration as if it were not deregistered (emphasis added). the issue in this appeal concerns whether or not this provision has the effect of retrospectively validating an invalid summons issued by a close corporation after deregistration so as to interrupt the running of prescription.a magistrate held that the provision had that effect, but the high court came to the contrary conclusion. with leave of the high court the appellant, a close corporation,now appeals to this court. [2] it is convenient at the outset to quote s 26 in full: (1) if a corporation has failed, for a period of more than six months, to lodge an annual return in compliance with section 15a or if the registrar has reasonable cause to believe that a corporation is not carrying on business or is not in operation, the registrar shall serve on the corporation as its postal address a letter by registered post in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : South Africa Supreme Court of Appeal
..... similarly in niksch v van niekerkit was held to be vexatious for a witness, who had already testified in a motor collision case that the accident that had occurred was occasioned by the negligence of the driver of the vehicle in which he was a passenger, to bring an action against the driver of the other vehicle involved in the collision in which he alleged that the accident had been caused by that drivers negligence. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : South Africa Supreme Court of Appeal
on appeal from: south gauteng high court, johannesburg (spilg j sitting as court of first instance): 1. the appeal is dismissed save to the extent reflected in the orders that follow. the order of the court below is set aside and replaced with the following order: (a) it is declared that interest in excess of the amount of r980 008, claimed by the respondent on the capital sum of r980 008 advanced by the respondent to the second applicant, contravenes the in duplum rule. (b) the respondent is ordered to make payment to first applicant of the sum of r1 284 187,49. (c) the respondent is ordered to pay the applicants costs, save that the applicants are ordered to pay one half of the respondents costs incurred in the rule 35 application. 2. the respondent is ordered to pay the appellants costs in the appeal up to and including 27 march 2013. 3. the appellants are ordered to pay the respondents costs in the appeal incurred after 27 march 2013. judgment swain aja (navsa adp, tshiqi and petse jja concurring): [1] the first appellant, mr paul casey (casey) and the second appellant, kimberley roller mills (pty) ltd (kimberley) unsuccessfully applied to the south gauteng high court (spilg j) for an order declaring that a debt owed by kimberley to the respondent, firstrand bank ltd (firstrand) which was secured by a standby letter of credit, issued by caseys bankers, the bank of america, had prescribed. [2] in addition, because the bank of america had honoured the letter of credit when .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : South Africa Supreme Court of Appeal
on appeal from:full court of the north gauteng high court, pretoria (mavundla, fabricius and mothle jj). 1. the appeal is upheld with costs. 2. the order of the court a quo dismissing the appellants appeal with costs is set aside and there is substituted an order which reads: (a) the appeal is upheld with costs. (b) judgment is granted in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant for: (i)payment of the sum of r724 494.29; (ii) interest a tempore morae on the aforesaid sum at the rate of 15.5 percent per annum from 17 october 2006 until date of payment; (iii) costs of suit. meyer aja(brand, lewis, bosielo and theron jja concurring) [1] this is an appeal against a judgment of the full court of the north gauteng high court dismissing an appeal against the judgment and order of ismail aj, sitting as court of first instance. the court of first instance dismissed with costs the claim of the appellant, stabilpave (pty) ltd, against the respondent, the south african revenue service, for payment of the sum of r724 494.29 plus interest and costs. i shall refer to the parties as sars and stabilpave. sars posted a cheque to stabilpaves postal address for the amount and interest claimed, but the cheque was stolen and paid to a thief. [2] the parties agreed on a written statement of facts. sars owed stabilpave a tax refund of r724 494.29. this amount was reflected as the amount due to stabilpave on the tax assessment form (ib34) dated 16 october 2006 which was issued to stabilpave. the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : South Africa Supreme Court of Appeal
on appeal from:limpopo high court, thohoyandou (hetisani j sitting as the sentencing court): 1. the appeal against conviction is dismissed. 2. the appeal against sentence is upheld. 3. the sentence of 30 years imprisonment imposed by the court below is replaced with 15 years imprisonment, antedated to 13 october 2001. judgment willis ja (maya, shongwe, pillay jja and zondi aja concurring): [1] this is an appeal against the conviction and sentence of 30 years imprisonment on a count of rape of a nine-year old girl. the appellant was arraigned before the regional court at thohoyandou. the allegations against him were that he had sexual intercourse with a child without her consent at the fandani village on 29 january 2001. [2] there are certain deficiencies in the record. most troubling is that parts thereof are missing. nevertheless, after some debate and the granting by this court of a number of different applications for condonation with the concurrence of the opposing sides, there was sufficient clarity for this court to move forward without risking injustice to any affected party. [3] on 13 october 2001 the appellant appeared before the learned magistrate, mrndou. his rights to legal representation were explained to him. he was duly warned that, if convicted, he was at risk of being sentenced to life imprisonment in terms of section 52 of the criminal law amendment act 105 of 1997 (the act). the appellant, who was 18 years old at the time, elected to conduct his own defence .....
Tag this Judgment!