CCT08/13

[2013] ZACC 37

2014 (1) BCLR 65 (CC)

2014 (2) SA 68 (CC)

[2014] 1 BLLR 1 (CC)

(2014) 35 ILJ 121 (CC)

Bosielo AJ Majority judgment

Zondo J minority judgment

23 May 2013

21 October 2013

http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/3705

Application for leave to appeal against a decision of the SCA refusing the applicant special leave to appeal against a judgment of the Labour Appeal Court: Grootboom v National Prosecuting Authority and Another (CA 7/11) [2012] ZALAC 28; (2013) 34 ILJ 282 (LAC); [2013] 5 BLLR 452 (LAC) (21 September 2012). The case was previously heard in the Labour Court Cape Town: Grootboom v National Prosecuting Authority and Another (C696/08) [2009] ZALC 143; (2010) 31 ILJ 1875 (LC) ; [2010] 9 BLLR 949 (LC) (18 December 2009).

Application for leave to appeal from the Labour Appeal Court concerning a deemed discharge in terms of section 17(5)(a) of the Public Service Act 103 of 1994 (the Act). Mr Grootboom, a public prosecutor, was suspended from his employment and thereafter left South Africa to study for 12 months. He was informed that he had been discharged by operation of the Act, which provides for the discharge, by mere operation of law and without prior notice or hearing, of public servants who absent themselves from their official duties for longer than one calendar month without permission. A majority of the Court refused to grant condonation for the late filing of the respondents’ papers. On the merits, the Court unanimously held that the requirements for deemed discharge under the Act had not been met because, in terms of his suspension, he had been barred from being at work and from performing any official duties. He therefore could not be said to have absented himself from those duties without his employer’s permission. The Court upheld the appeal with costs. Majority: Bosielo AJ (Moeseneke DCJ, Froneman J, Jafta J, Khampepe J, Mhlantla AJ, Nkabinde J and Skweyiya J concurring). Minority: Zondo J.