constitutional issue Archives

Age discrimination considered: LRA s 187(2)(b): Rogers J

by GilesFiles | Dec 20, 2024 | 2020 onwards, 2020 onwards, AB - Law generally, AB1 - Fairness principle or concept, Allowed, Appeals, Appeals - leave, AUD, Automatic, Bill of Rights, Causes and defences, ConCourt judges, Constitutional Court, Contractual breach, Costs, Courts, Declaratory, Deemed, Dignity equality freedom, Disallowed, Discrimination (LRL 11), EEA 1998, EEA Chpt II ss 5-11, Evidence & onus, False assumptions, Fixed-term, Hearing procedure, Insights, Interpretation etc, Judges, Jurisdiction & powers, Just and equitable relief, Labour Relations, Landmark judgments, Lawfulness & fairness, Legal Practice, Legality principle, Legislation, Logistics, LRA 1995, LRA 8a: 185-197B Dismissal, Management, Notice requirements, OL Rogers, Operation of law, Orders, Parties, Private enterprises, Protectable interests, Provisos, Public policy, Resolving disputes (LRL 3), Retirement, Review tests, Sectors, Statutes (LRL 2)-work, Statutory, Termination (LRL 8), Topics | 0 |

For subscribers only Whilst some judgment summaries are available to all, this judgment summary is reserved for subscribers only. If you are already a subscriber, you can login to see this judgment summary. If you cannot login,...

Age-based discrimination: Section 187(2)(b) of LRA?

by GilesFiles | Dec 20, 2024 | 2020 onwards, 2020 onwards, AB - Law generally, AB1 - Fairness principle or concept, Allowed, Appeals, Appeals - leave, AUD, Automatic, Bill of Rights, Causes and defences, ConCourt judges, Constitutional Court, Contractual breach, Costs, Courts, Declaratory, Deemed, Dignity equality freedom, Disallowed, Discrimination (LRL 11), EEA 1998, EEA Chpt II ss 5-11, Evidence & onus, False assumptions, Fixed-term, Granted, Hearing procedure, Insights, Interpretation etc, Judges, Jurisdiction & powers, Just and equitable relief, Labour Relations, Landmark judgments, Lawfulness & fairness, Legal Practice, Legality principle, Legislation, Logistics, LRA 1995, LRA 8a: 185-197B Dismissal, Management, Markets in SA, Notice requirements, Operation of law, Orders, Parties, philosophy / economics, Policies - all, Private enterprises, Protectable interests, Provisos, Public policy, Resolving disputes (LRL 3), Retired judges, Retirement, Review tests, RMM Zondo, Sectors, Selected judges, Statutes (LRL 2)-work, Statutory, Termination (LRL 8), Topics, Trade | 0 |

For subscribers only Whilst some judgment summaries are available to all, this judgment summary is reserved for subscribers only. If you are already a subscriber, you can login to see this judgment summary. If you cannot login,...

Disciplinary process considered: Simple factual dispute?

by GilesFiles | Jul 12, 2023 | 2020 onwards, Bill of Rights, Causes and defences, Central, ConCourt judges, Constitutional Court, Contractual breach, Costs, Courts, Government, Judges, Labour Relations, Legal Practice, Legislation, LRA 1995, LRA 7: 112-184 Dispute, Orders, Parties, Review tests, Rules Codes & Manual, Sectors, State Owned Enterprises, Statutes (LRL 2)-work, Statutory, Termination (LRL 8), Topics, Trust & confidence | 0 |

SA Council for Educators v Scheepers When should an investigation involving an evaluation of facts concerning a disciplinary process be considered a constitutional issue? “[39] Whether an investigation as conducted by SACE...

Private law claim: Based on public law duty

by GilesFiles | Nov 26, 2015 | 2015, 2015 and earlier, Bill of Rights, Causes and defences, ConCourt judges, Constitutional Court, Courts, Delict, Judges, Landmark judgments, MTR Mogoeng, Parties, Sectors, State Owned Enterprises, Topics | 0 |

Mashongwa v PRASA (CCT03/15) [2015] ZACC 557 (26 November 2015) per Mogoeng CJ (Moseneke DCJ, Cameron J, Jafta J, Khampepe J, Madlanga J, Matojane AJ, Nkabinde J, Van der Westhuizen J, Wallis AJ and Zondo J concurring): The...

Tag: constitutional issue

Age discrimination considered: LRA s 187(2)(b): Rogers J

Age-based discrimination: Section 187(2)(b) of LRA?

Disciplinary process considered: Simple factual dispute?

Private law claim: Based on public law duty