GilesFiles, Author at GilesFiles

Increasing profits acceptable: Valid and fair dismissal reason

Posted by GilesFiles | May 11, 2004 | 2014 and earlier, 64 Strikes/lockouts, 64-77 Strikes, AB1 - Fairness principle or concept, AH - Labour Legislation & Rules, Appeals, Appeals - leave, Bumping, Causes and defences, Courts, False assumptions, Free and fair, Insights, Interpretation etc, Judges, Jurisdiction & powers, Labour Appeal Court, Labour Relations, LAC judges, Legal Practice, Legislation, LRA 04: 64-69 Power plays (LRL 6), Management, Managerial prerogative, Orders, Parties, Resolving disputes (LRL 3), Retired judges, Review tests, Rules Codes & Manual, Sectors, Statutes (LRL 2)-work, Topics |

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,...

Exemption clause interpreted: Ineffective provisions

Posted by GilesFiles | Mar 18, 2004 | 2014 and earlier, 2015 and earlier, Appeals, Appeals - leave, Associations/corporates, Bill of Rights, Causes and defences, Courts, Disallowed, Exceptions/special pleas, General, Hospitality, Judges, Landmark judgments, Legal Practice, Non-profit organisations, Orders, Parties, Private enterprises, Retired judges, Roman Dutch law, SCA judges, Sectors, Special pleas, Supreme Court of Appeal, Topics |

Johannesburg Country Club v Stott Exemption clause interpreted strictly and SCA stated that a provision was also partially ineffective, at least to the extent that it purports to provide an exemption against the claims of guests...

Alleging racial discrimination: Proving constructive dismissal?

Posted by GilesFiles | Aug 14, 2003 | 2014 and earlier, Applications, Bill of Rights, Causes and defences, Constructive: 186(1)(e), Courts, Declaratory, Discrimination (LRL 11), Evidence & onus, Insights, Interpretation etc, Intolerable, Judges, Jurisdiction & powers, Labour Court, Labour Court judges, Labour Relations, Lawfulness & fairness, Legal Practice, Legislation, LRA 08a: 185-197B Dismissal, LRA 1995, Mining, Orders, Parties, Personal services, Private enterprises, Resignations, Resolving disputes (LRL 3), Rules Codes & Manual, Sectors, Statutes (LRL 2)-work, Statutory, Termination (LRL 8), Topics |

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,...

Exemption clause considered: Ticket cases

Posted by GilesFiles | May 23, 2003 | 2014 and earlier, Courts, Judges, Supreme Court of Appeal |

 Essence Telefaxed quotation not including exemption clause and cannot be construed as including it and considered the ‘ticket’ cases and held that reasonable steps were not taken to alert the recipient of the telefax to the...

Deregistering employers’ organisation: Bogus claim?

Posted by GilesFiles | Mar 25, 2003 | 2014 and earlier, Applications, Associations/corporates, Causes and defences, Central, Costs, Courts, Declaratory, Evidence & onus, Government, Interpretation etc, Judges, Jurisdiction & powers, Labour Court, Labour Court judges, Labour Relations, Legal Practice, Legislation, LRA 03: 11-63 Bargain, LRA 06: 95-111 Unions, LRA 07: 112-184 Dispute, LRA 1995, Objective - correctness, Orders, Organisations (LRL 4), Parties, Personal services, Review tests, Rules Codes & Manual, Sectors, State organs, Statutes (LRL 2)-work, Statutory, Topics |

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,...

Author: GilesFiles

Increasing profits acceptable: Valid and fair dismissal reason

Exemption clause interpreted: Ineffective provisions

Alleging racial discrimination: Proving constructive dismissal?

Exemption clause considered: Ticket cases

Deregistering employers’ organisation: Bogus claim?