Moroenyane v SCommander of the SAPS – Vanderbijlpark (J1672/2016) [2016] ZALCJHB 330 ; [2016] JOL 36595 (26 August 2016) per S Snyman AJ.

After cautioning against the increase in the number of applications to intervene in incomplete disciplinary proceedings the LC lifted the unlawful suspension of the applicant  because it was in conflict with the SAPS disciplinary regulations.

LC summary:

  • Interdict application – principles stated – application of principles to matter – issue of clear right, prejudice and alternative remedy considered
  • Jurisdiction – Labour Court does have jurisdiction to consider urgent applications to intervene in the case of incomplete disciplinary proceedings – exceptional and compelling reasons however required – exceptional circumstances not shown
  • Disciplinary proceedings – delay in proceeding with disciplinary hearing – does not per se mean that disciplinary hearing unfair and unreasonable – waiver or manifest unfairness / unreasonableness needs to be shown
  • Disciplinary proceedings – delay in proceeding with disciplinary hearing – employer must provide proper explanation for delay – explanation provided
  • Alternative remedy – applicant raised issue of the delay and unfair disciplinary hearing before disciplinary chairperson – issue can therefore serve as basis for an unfair dismissal challenge in any bargaining council proceedings- alternative remedy available
  • Prejudice – real prejudice must be shown to justify relief – no material prejudice shown
  • Suspension – suspension shown to be unlawful – suspension uplifted.