n SA Mercantile Law Journal = SA Tydskrif vir Handelsreg - When ancestors call an employee : reflections on the judgment of the Supreme Court of Appeal in the Kievits Kroon Country Estate v Mmoledi case : case note
|Article Title||When ancestors call an employee : reflections on the judgment of the Supreme Court of Appeal in the Kievits Kroon Country Estate v Mmoledi case : case note|
|© Publisher:||Juta Law Publishing|
|Journal||SA Mercantile Law Journal = SA Tydskrif vir Handelsreg|
|Affiliations||1 University of South Africa and 2 University of South Africa|
|Publication Date||Jan 2015|
|Pages||163 - 173|
This is a labour dispute which for a period of about seven years, has been moving from one forum to another (The Disciplinary Hearing of 2007, the CCMA hearing, Kievits Kroon Country Estate (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others  3 BLLR 241 (LC); Kievits Kroon Country Estate (Pty) Ltd v Mmoledi and Others (2012) 33 ILJ 2812 (LAC); Kievits Kroon Country Estate v Mmoledi (875/12)  ZASCA 189 (29 November 2013)). Legally, there is nothing untoward about this as the Constitution provides everyone with the right to have their dispute decided in a court of law, tribunal or forum (see s 34 of the Constitution, 1996). This provision implies that a party not happy with the decision of one forum or another can apply for a review or appeal to the next forum, which in this case, is what Kievits Kroon has done. Notwithstanding this constitutional provision, courts are alert to the fact that rich and powerful litigants can use their superior and dominant position as an attempt to wear off a litigant in a less controlling position (see Billiton Aluminium SA Ltd t/a Hillside Aluminium v Khanyile and Others 2010 (5) BCLR 422 (CC) para 52). Though this issue did not arise in the Kievits Kroon case, the Supreme Court of Appeal seems to have been keen to bring this matter to finality when it ordered that "following the CCMA hearing, two courts told the appellant that its appeal had no merit, although no cost order was made against it. But the appellant persisted with a further appeal to this court. In these circumstances it is appropriate that costs should now follow the result" (Kievits Kroon Country Estate v Mmoledi para 33).
Article metrics loading...