On appeal the respondents relied on a further contention, namely, that the terminating members need not have been joined because they were represented by the three trade unions that were cited as applicants in the court a quo.  If supported by the facts, this contention could have given rise to interesting questions of procedure.  For instance, whether a trade union can conduct litigation on behalf of its members outside the ambit of s 38 of the Constitution and outside the institutions created by the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995.  But the contention founders on the facts.  Nowhere in the papers is it alleged that all the terminating members were also members of one of the three trade unions cited as applicants.  On the contrary, the pertinent allegation is that only some of the terminating members belong to the trade unions involved.

Justice of appeal Brand in City of Johannesburg v South African Local Authorities Pension Fund (20045/2014) [2015] ZASCA 4 (9 March 2015) at para 15.