CCT29/18

[2019] ZACC 17

2019 (7) BCLR 826 (CC)

(2019) 40 ILJ 1731 (CC)

[2019] 11 BLLR 1189 (CC)

Basson AJ

14 November 2018

30 April 2019

http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/36563

Application for leave to appeal against the judgment of the Labour Appeal Court: Edcon Ltd v Steenkamp and Others (JA125/2017) [2017] ZALAC 81; [2018] 3 BLLR 230 (LAC); (2018) 39 ILJ 531 (LAC) (18 December 2017). See also the judgment of Johannesburg Labour Court: Steenkamp and Others v Edcon Ltd (J294/16) [2017] ZALCJHB 487 (13 June 2017). The matter is a sequel to protracted litigation between the parties that came before the Constitutional Court; see the earlier related judgment: Steenkamp and Others v Edcon Limited (CCT46/15, CCT47/15) [2016] ZACC 1; (2016) 37 ILJ 564 (CC); 2016 (3) BCLR 311 (CC); [2016] 4 BLLR 335 (CC); 2016 (3) SA 251 (CC) (22 January 2016).

Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 — dismissal for operational requirements — application in terms of section 189A(13) brought outside of time limits — condonation refused — failed legal strategy alone not sufficient to show good cause — labour matters are expeditious in nature — section 189A(13)(d) compensation remedy not a stand-alone remedy and dependent on the inappropriateness of remedies (a)-(c)