SUMMARY This matter concerns the First Respondent’s award finding that the dismissal of the Fourth Respondent was substantively unfair, ordering his reinstatement. The Applicant sought an order setting aside the award, while the Fourth Respondent applied for the award to be made an order of court. The Fourth Respondent’s dismissal arose from his failure to

Levy Clearance Certificates

Written by: Chantelle Gladwin-Wood, Partner and Dr Jan Harm Swanepoel, Candidate Attorney   Introduction This article examines the law in relation to Levy Clearance Certificates, which must ordinarily be obtained before transfer can be passed of a unit in a Sectional Title Scheme.   What is a Levy Clearance Certificate? This is a document which
SUMMARY Skansen Interiors Limited (“SIL”) was, until it ceased trading in 2014, a small refurbishment company operating mainly in London. In 2013, SIL won tenders from DTZ Debenham Tie Leung (“DTZ”) for two office refurbishment contracts jointly worth £6 million (“Tender Contracts”). Pursuant to the award of the Tender Contracts, allegations arose that that SIL’s
SUMMARY The interpretation of Section 198A(3)(b) of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 (“the Act”) is an issue that has found itself before the South African courts on a frequent basis over the last couple of years. In 2015, Assign Services (Pty) Ltd (“Assign”) which is a temporary employment service (“TES”), or labour broker,
SUMMARY The Respondent entered into a loan agreement in favour of the Appellant. In terms of this agreement, the Appellant bought medical equipment from the Respondent and, in return, drew a number of blank cheques in favour of the Respondent. Contemplated in the amounts of said cheques was a “participating share of the profit”, to
SUMMARY The Appellant was arrested, alongside two other men, on charges of robbery with aggravating circumstances, the unlawful possession of firearms and being in possession of property that was suspected of being stolen. The Appellant applied in the Magistrates court, Fort Beaufort, to be released on bail, which application was denied as it was ruled
BACKGROUND Cornelius Vermaak and Marline Vermaak (“the Vermaaks”) were employed by Paledi Superspar and Paledi Tops (“Paledi”), respectively, as managers of the businesses. Paledi obtained trading stock on credit from the Spar Group Ltd (“Spar”). As security for their acknowledged indebtedness to Spar, on 4 December 2013, two general notarial covering bonds were registered over
SUMMARY The Applicants, who were formerly employed by the First Respondent’s brick factory, were entitled to occupy various farm units on the brick factory’s property, free of charge, for the duration of their employment. The Applicants were dismissed on disciplinary grounds. However, despite becoming employed elsewhere and having received written notice from the First Respondent
SUMMARY The Applicant (‘Standard Bank’) lodged an application to review and set aside the decision of the Respondent (‘the Commission’) to refer it to the Competition Tribunal (‘the Tribunal’), wherein the Commission alleged that Standard Bank, together with other banks, engaged in cartel conduct prohibited by s4(1)(b)(i) and (ii) of the Competition Act 89 of
SUMMARY The factual matrix from which this judgment originates concerns a dispute between AMCU (“the Trade Union”) and Murray & Roberts (“the Employer”). At the heart of contentions between the parties was the Trade Union’s ability to acquire organisational rights from the Employer.  The Employer maintained that a contract had been concluded between the respective