https://www.polity.org.za
Deepening Democracy through Access to Information
Home / Case Law / High Courts RSS ← Back
Close

Email this article

separate emails by commas, maximum limit of 4 addresses

Sponsored by

Close

Embed Video

National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa and Others v Thyden Steel CC and Another (J1813/14) [2014] ZALCJHB 442

National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa and Others v Thyden Steel CC and Another (J1813/14) [2014] ZALCJHB 442

14th November 2014

SAVE THIS ARTICLE      EMAIL THIS ARTICLE

Font size: -+

  • National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa and Others v Thyden Steel CC and Another (J1813/14) [2014] ZALCJHB 442
    Download
    0.28 MB
Sponsored by

Introduction:

[1]        On 29 July 2014, the Honourable Lagrange J issued an order in the following terms:

Advertisement

“Having read the documents and having considered the matter:

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

Advertisement

1. The provisions of the Rules relating to times and manner of service referred to therein are dispensed with and the matter is dealt with as one of urgency in terms of Rule 8 of the Rules for the conduct of proceedings in the Labour Court.

2. A rule nisi is issued calling upon the First & Second Respondents to appear and show cause on 06 November 2014 why an order should not be granted in the following terms:

2.1       Declaring that the transfer of the machinery and equipment of the First Respondents and the First Respondents customers by the First Respondent to the Second Respondent constitutes a transfer of a going concern as contemplated by section 197 of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 as amended (the LRA);

2.2       Directing the Second Respondent to employ the Second to Further Applicants on the same terms and conditions they enjoyed under the employ of the First Respondent;

2.3       Directing the Second Respondent to employ the Second to Further Applicants immediately and retrospective to their date of dismissal by the First Respondent if their employment contracts have already been terminated by the First Respondent;

2.4       In the event that they are still employed by the First Respondent, directing the Second Respondent to employ the Second to Further Applicants immediately when the First Respondent terminates their employment contracts;

3.    The provisions of paragraphs 2.1 and 2.4 will operate with immediate effect as an interim order pending a final order being made on the return day of the rule nisi.”

[2]        On the return date, notwithstanding the fact that the Applicants had indicated their intention to discharge the rule nisi as issued above, the Second Respondent persisted in seeking an order of costs, which is the only only issue for determination in this matter.

EMAIL THIS ARTICLE      SAVE THIS ARTICLE

To subscribe email subscriptions@creamermedia.co.za or click here
To advertise email advertising@creamermedia.co.za or click here

Comment Guidelines

About

Polity.org.za is a product of Creamer Media.
www.creamermedia.co.za

Other Creamer Media Products include:
Engineering News
Mining Weekly
Research Channel Africa

Read more

Subscriptions

We offer a variety of subscriptions to our Magazine, Website, PDF Reports and our photo library.

Subscriptions are available via the Creamer Media Store.

View store

Advertise

Advertising on Polity.org.za is an effective way to build and consolidate a company's profile among clients and prospective clients. Email advertising@creamermedia.co.za

View options
Free daily email newsletter Register Now