| dc.date.accessioned | 2017-04-08T17:13:36Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2017-04-08T17:13:36Z | |
| dc.date.created | 2010-11-22 | en |
| dc.identifier.citation | [2010] ZACC 22 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | [2011] 2 BLLR 109 (CC) | |
| dc.identifier.citation | (2010) 31 ILJ 2825 (CC) | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 2011 (3) BCLR 325 (CC) | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/3632 | |
| dc.title | Zwane and Others v Alert Fencing Contractors CC | en |
| dc.title.alternative | CCT87/10 | en |
| dc.identifier.casenumber | CCT87/10 | en |
| dc.date.judgment | 23 November 2010 | |
| dc.link.judgment | http://collections.concourt.org.za/bitstream/handle/20.500.12144/3632/Full%20judgment%20Official%20version%20%2848%20Kb%29-16094.pdf?sequence=8&isAllowed=y | |
| dc.concourt.casehistory | The applicants sought leave to appeal against a decision of the Labour Appeal Court which upheld the Labour Court's decision to rescind a default judgment order obtained by the applicants against the respondent. The applicants alleged that the Labour Appeal Court's decision that Rule 6(7) of the Rules for the Conduct of Proceedings in the Labour Court required notice of the application for default judgment to be given to the respondent as a pre-requisite to judgment being granted was incorrect. This Court dismissed the application for leave to appeal finding that the decision of the Labour Appeal Court was correct and not susceptible to criticism. The Court also commented that it was unacceptable that the applicants' claim for unfair dismissal had not been finalised after such a long period of time and therefore ordered the Judge President of the Labour Court to do everything possible to ensure that the case was heard as a matter of urgency. Judgment of the Court. |