![]() ![]() Material facts to the dispute are uncontested. It was one day late and theĭelay is adequately explained. Third, we condone the late filing ofĪpplicant’s written argument. ![]() Also, theĪdded record is helpful because it provides insights into the Prejudice has been claimed or suffered by any party. It is drawn fromįull record that served before the preceding courts. The record is minimalĪnd contains neither new nor disputed matter. It is in the interest of a proper adjudication of this ![]() We have to decide whether the applicant and theĪmicus curiae may supplement the truncated record filed in thisĬourt. Reasoning and outcomes of the two appellate courts impel us to Seized with a dispute over pressing constitutional concerns ofĮquality and non-discrimination – matters of considerable Before I narrate the facts, let me dispose of Which sits at the hub of this dispute was negotiated and The Police Service Employment Equity Plan ![]() Organisation are members of and parties to the safety and security Union in the Police Service, the Correctional Service and the trafficĭepartments. To be appointed to the position she sought earlier but an order forĬourt has admitted the Police and Prisons Civil Rights Union as aįriend of the court (amicus curiae). Lieutenant-Colonel in the National Inspectorate Division of the Trade union oppose the application and urge the Court to dismiss theĪppeal. Has represented her throughout the litigation. The National Commissioner’s decision unfairlyīarnard is a member of a registered trade union, Solidarity, which The core issue in that and this Court remains unchanged. The Police Service, Captain Renate M Barnard (Ms Barnard), unfairlyĭiscriminated against her on the ground of race contraryĩ(3) of the Constitution and section 6(1) of the Employment Equity Police Service (National Commissioner) not to promote an employee Set aside the order of the Labour Appeal Court Īnd concluded that the decision of the National Commissioner of the Service), for leave to appeal against an order of the Supreme In an application, by the South African Police Service (Police There is no order as to costs in the Labour Court, the Labour AppealĬourt, the Supreme Court of Appeal and in this Court.ĪCJ (Skweyiya ADCJ, Dambuza AJ, Jafta J, Khampepe J, Madlanga J andĬase brings to the fore difficult, if not emotive, questions ofĮquality, race and equity at the workplace. The order of the Labour Appeal Court is upheld The order of the Supreme Court of Appeal is setĦ. The appeal against the decision of the Supremeĥ. Leave to supplement the record is granted.Ĥ. Condonation for the late filing of writtenģ. National Commissioner vested with discretion to fill vacancyĪdvance representivity and enhance service deliveryĪppeal from the Supreme Court of Appeal (hearing an appeal from theĢ. Amicus CuriaeĬoram: Moseneke ACJ, Skweyiya ADCJ, Cameron J, DambuzaĪJ, Froneman J, Jafta J, Khampepe J, Madlanga J, Majiedt AJ, Van derĮquality - unfair discrimination - restitutionaryĮmployment Equity Act 55 of 1998 - section 6 - unfair discriminationĮmployment Equity Act 55 of 1998 - section 15 - affirmative actionĪfrican Police Service Employment Equity Plan - numericalĪfrican Police Service National Instruction 1 of 2004. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |