IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION GRAHAMSTOWN
|
|
- Pierce Booth
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 1 REPORTABLE/NOT REPORTABLE IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION GRAHAMSTOWN In the matter between Case No: 1860/2011 Date Heard: 18/08/11 Order Delivered: 30/09/11 Reasons Available: 30/09/11 REVEREND SIMON GUZANA ZAZAZA First Applicant LLC DUZE CONGREGATION CHURCH Second Applicant and UNITED CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH OF SOUTHERN AFRICA First Respondent REVEREND HENDRICK PILLAY: THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED CHURCH OF SOUTHERN AFRICA Second Respondent REVEREND DR MP DIBEELA: THE GENERAL SECRETARY Third Respondent REVEREND ERIC MTHANA Fourth Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT [1] The first applicant ( the Reverend ), was suspended by the Assembly Executive Committee of the first respondent, (the committee)
2 pending an investigation into certain allegations of misconduct. The Reverend, aggrieved by his suspension approached this court, allegedly joined by the second applicant, on 3 June 2011 in urgent proceedings, seeking a rule nisi aimed by setting aside the decision of the committee to suspend him and interdicting the respondents from interfering with the contractual obligations of the Reverend as Minister in charge of his church namely the second applicant. It is not apparent from the papers on what basis the second applicant is cited in these proceedings. The applicants also seek a punitive costs order against the first three respondents. [2] The first respondent opposes the application on its merits. The second and third respondents only oppose the interdict and cost order sought against them. The fourth respondent who has been appointed as an acting minister in the Reverend s place, while the latter is on suspension, has indicated that he abides the decision of the court. The first respondent also instituted a counter-application for a mandatory order, directing the first applicant to comply with his suspension and to refrain from any involvement in the affairs of the second applicant during his suspension, or any extension thereof. An interdict was also sought to restrain the Reverend from instigating or causing disorder and disruption in the affairs of the second applicant aimed at preventing or frustrating the implementation of his suspension. A punitive costs order is similarly sought against the applicants. [3] The first respondent raised three points in limine. The matter was about to be argued, when counsel for the first respondent indicated that these points would no longer be pursued and that the application would be opposed on its merits. [4] The applicant challenged his suspension on two grounds. The first was that his suspension was ultra vires in that the first respondent and its
3 3 Executive Committee( the Committee ) were not empowered to suspend him. The second ground was that the first respondent had breached the audi alteram partem rule by not affording him an opportunity to state his before the suspension. [5] The applicant also challenged the authority of Reverend Dibeela, (cited as the third respondent) to oppose the application on behalf of the first respondent. The third respondent is the General Secretary of the first respondent. The second respondent, the president of the third respondent, Reverend Pillay, stated in his affidavit that Reverend Dibeela was duly authorised to act on the first respondent s behalf by the officers of the Assembly in accordance with the provisions of the first respondent s constitution. There is accordingly no merit in this point taken and I will proceed to deal with the two main challenges. [6] The applicant answered the Call as Minister of the church (second applicant) in July In July 2008 certain members of the church, which falls under the Kei Region, lodged complaints about the Reverend to the Regional Council (the Region). The Region then referred the matter to the Deacons of the church. Nothing much happened and the members, who raised the complaints in July, raised these complaints again in September A meeting was scheduled by the Kei Ministerial Committee for 11 October 2008 which was not attended by the Reverend. Various procedural objections were raised by him then. [7] According to the first respondent, the Kei Regional Council (the Region) appointed a Commission to investigate the allegations or complaints which concerned the Reverend s alleged irregular use of church funds and several other complaints which resulted in acrimony
4 amongst members of the church. There were certain investigations which apparently came to nought. During June 2010, the Synod again had cause to consider the continued conflict in the church and decided upon an independent investigation. There were also further complaints. The main problem appears to be the rift between supporters and nonsupporters of the Reverend. It is important to stress here that the guilt of the Reverend in respect of all the accusations has never been established. The first respondent is only desirous to investigate the allegations at the point. [8] According to the first respondent, it was decided that an investigation should be held without the involvement of the Reverend and to suspend him because the first respondent believed that the Reverend was obstructive and hampered the investigation. The Reverend seems to have great difficulty in accepting the position adopted by the first respondent. [9] In support of the argument that the committee (as opposed to the Regional Council) did not have the necessary power to suspend the Reverend, reliance was placed on clause of the first respondent s constitution ( the Constitution ) in Procedure 13 thereof, which deals with complaints against ministers. It reads as follows: In the event of a preliminary investigation establishing that there are grounds for a full investigation, the Region may suspend the Minister, with full stipend, against whom the charges were laid from the Ministerial duties. An Acting Minister will be appointed for the period, to the Church concerned (emphasis added). [10] The aforesaid clause indeed confers on the Region the power to
5 5 suspend a minister. However this does not exclude the power of the higher structures such as the Synod or the Assembly from doing the same. The Region s powers are ultimately subject to those of the Assembly. The constitution provides that the Assembly (and therefore its executive committee) enjoys appellate as well as original disciplinary jurisdiction over the church. [11] The following clauses are significant: In terms of clause of the constitution the Assembly has general pastoral and disciplinary oversight over the Church in its entirety. [12] The Assembly normally exercises its pastoral and disciplinary oversight in cases brought before it by Regional Councils and Synods by reference, complaint and appeal, but it retains the right of full investigation in all cases of discipline. The Assembly and the committee therefore have original as well as appellate powers. [13] Clause 6.1 of the constitution provides that the Assembly is the governing body of the Church and its highest court. [14] In effect, the Reverend challenges this highest authority with reference to the clauses cited above, and a proper interpretation of the constitution regarding disciplinary powers is, that although the Regional Council would be the first structure seized with the matter, the committee, who would normally be seized with appeals, is also empowered to suspend or take other disciplinary action as a structure of the first instance.
6 [15] As I understand it, the Reverend s further argument on this point was that because he is an employee of the church he can only be suspended by the Region. It is not necessary in this matter to determine whether the Reverend is an employee or not. Even if he were an employee of the Church, and not of Assembly or the Committee, he is still subject to their disciplinary powers. That is a matter of common sense. A useful comparison referred to by counsel for the first respondent in support of this point was, that this situation could be compared to that of persons in other professions with regard to their governing structures, e.g. an advocate and the Bar Council; an attorney and the Law Society; a nurse and the Health Professions Council. [16] When the Reverend noted an appeal against his suspension in a letter addressed to the denomination or Assembly against the decision to suspend him taken by the Synod, he stated the following in a letter: Lastly I have heard and saw a synod ministerial committee report that states that I need to go on three months leave, which is unconstitutional. It is my understanding that such a recommendation should go to the UCCSA Executive (emphasis added). Significantly, this is an acknowledgement on the Reverend s own part, that he is subject to the committee s disciplinary powers. [17] The complaint which was the subject-matter of the suspension, was laid against the Reverend with the Kei Regional Council. In terms of clause of Procedure 13 of the constitution, the Regional Ministerial Committee must institute a full investigation into such a complaint, when a preliminary investigation reveals that there is substance to the complaint. The Reverend however, appealed to the Synod before the
7 7 Region made any pronouncement on the issue. The Synod then decided to suspend the Reverend pending a full investigation. Before the investigation process was completed, the Reverend appealed to the Committee who also then decided to suspend him pending a full investigation. In my view, the applicant s complaint that the committee was not empowered to suspend him, is without any merit. [18] The second complaint, namely that he was not afforded a hearing before his suspension, is equally without merit. Before his suspension, the Reverend was heard by the Elders or Deacons of the Region who wanted to discuss the complaints which were made. The respondent raised procedural objections. The Reverend was given a charge sheet, and he did present a case thereon or responded thereto before the Kei Region according to the first respondent. Pursuant to the appeal, the Assembly Executive Committee, the Commission scheduled meetings for 15 and 17 November 2010 at the LLC Duze Church and later on 23 and 24 March 2011 at King Williams Town. No new charges were formulated after the Kei discussions. The meetings aforesaid were convened inter alia with the purpose of hearing the Reverend on the question of the suspension. He did not attend the November meetings on the March meetings. [19] It can hardly be said that the Reverend was unaware of the charges, or that the audi alteram partem rule was breached with regard to him. He did receive a charge sheet and did not attend several meetings held to discuss the matters surrounding him. Where a party is afforded an opportunity to attend at a tribunal and to be heard, but fails to do so, he may be regarded as a person who has been properly summoned and has failed to appear, and a decision is made in his absence will not on that account be set aside on review. A person who is
8 invited to put his case and refused cannot reply upon a breach of the audi rule. (Rose-Innes in Judicial Review of Administrative Tribunals in South Africa page 157. See also: Radloff v Clocolan Ko-Operatiewe Landbou Bpk 1955 (3) SA 418 (A) at 423 B). [20] The Reverend s explanation for not attending the March 2011 meetings was not acceptable. He informed the committee that he had to take his children to school and therefore could not attend the meeting. I agree with counsel for the first respondent s description of this explanation as a lame excuse. A person who genuinely wanted to persuade the committee that there was no merit in the charges levelled against him, would have made alternative arrangements for his children and attend the meeting. The Reverend seems to labour under the misguided notion that was entitled to a full hearing before he could be suspended. The opportunity he was qiven, namely to appear at two scheduled meetings was clearly sufficient. Therefore, the complaint of not being heard before his suspension was entirely of the Reverend s own making. The Reverend has made out no grounds for interference with the decision of the first respondent. The Counter-Application [21] The Reverend has clearly demonstrated that he would not comply with the conditions of his suspension, and in particular, to desist from participating in the activities of the LLC Duze Church. He has in his reply stated categorically that he would continue to do so at the behest of the congregation. He has also added to the existing prolixity of his papers by attaching a petition to his replying affidavit, purportedly signed by members of his congregation, seeking to drum up support for his
9 9 continued presence in the church. Such antics are entirely inappropriate in a review application. [22] Violence has also broken out in the church community and a manse has been burnt down. The first respondent contends that the Reverend and his followers made it impossible for it to implement the Reverend s suspension and to investigate the complaints against him. The first respondent clearly should be permitted to investigate the complaints and be permitted to restore calm and order to the Congregation. It is therefore entitled to the relief it seeks in its counter-claim. [23] The manner in which the Reverend has chosen to litigate in this matter leaves much to be desired. He burdened the record with voluminous papers consisting of irrelevant material, mostly typed in a very large font which created unnecessary volume. He introduced new evidence (including the petition) into his replying affidavit. This was entirely unnecessarily in this relatively simple matter. There is no justification for the denomination to be out of pocket because the Reverend does not tolerate any challenge to his authority. The Reverend also could not provide any evidence, despite being invited to do so, in the answering affidavit, that the actual congregational of the LLC Duze Church is properly before court as second applicant. That should have been done in accordance with a decision taken at a church meeting, authorising the church to join the Reverend as second applicant. [24] A punitive costs order against the Reverend personally is therefore warranted in these circumstances.
10 [25] Accordingly the following order is made: 1. The application brought by the first applicant is dismissed. 2. The counter-application brought by the first respondent succeeds and the first applicant is hereby interdicted from: 2.1 involving himself in the affairs of the LLC Duze Congregational Church during his period of suspension or any extension thereof; 2.2 from instigating or causing disruption in the affairs of the church; 2.3 from instigating conduct designed to prevent the implementation of his suspension. 3. The applicant is to pay the costs of the main application and the counter-application on a scale as between attorney and client. E REVELAS JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT Counsel for the Applicants: Adv Sandi Grahamstown Instructed by: NN Dullabh & Co Grahamstown Counsel for the Respondents: Adv D Potgieter (SC)
11 11 Instructed by: Netteltons Grahamstown Date Heard: 18 August 2011 Date of Order Delivered: 30 September 2011 Reasons Available: 30 September 2011
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, PORT ELIZABETH JUDGMENT
1 REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, PORT ELIZABETH JUDGMENT Not Reportable CASE NO: P 322/15 In the matter between ANDILE FANI Applicant and First Respondent EXECUTIVE MAYOR,
More informationsubsist for one year and shall be intimated in advance to the Principal Clerk. Persons may be re-appointed up to a maximum of three times.
III. DISCIPLINE OF MINISTRY ACT (AS AMENDED BY ACTS III AND IX 2002 AND III 2003, X 2004, III 2005, XVI 2006, I AND II 2007, VII 2008, I 2009, III, 2010, III 2011, I AND Vl 2012, II 2013, II 2014, III
More informationIN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD AT JOHANNESBURG
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD AT JOHANNESBURG Reportable CASE NO: J20/2010 In the matter between: MOHLOPI PHILLEMON MAPULANE Applicant and MADIBENG LOCAL MUNICIPALITY First Respondent ADV VAN
More informationIN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD AT CAPE TOWN CASE NO.: C611/07
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD AT CAPE TOWN CASE NO.: C611/07 In the matter between : SAMWU (OBO M. ABRAHAMS & 106 OTHERS) Applicant and CITY OF CAPE TOWN Respondent JUDGMENT [1] This is an application
More informationJUDGMENT. [1] The applicants herein had earlier approached this Court for an order, inter
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE LOCAL DIVISION, PORT ELIZABETH NOT REPORTABLE In the matter between: ANTHONY LAURISTON BIGGS RIDGE FARM CC Case no: 3323/2013 Date heard: 6.3.2014 Date
More informationGeneral Synod Episcopal Standards (Child Protection) Canon 2017 Adopting Ordinance 2017
General Synod Episcopal Standards (Child Protection) Canon 2017 Adopting Ordinance 2017 (Reprinted under the Interpretation Ordinance 1985.) Clause Table of Provisions 1....................... Name 2.......................
More informationStay up to date with the latest developments in Labour law EDITION 9/2016. Labour Newsflash
Stay up to date with the latest developments in Labour law EDITION 9/2016 Welcome to the next edition of the Labour Newsflash. Labour Newsflash As always, labour law is never boring and the current labour
More informationIV. PROTECTION AGAINST BULLYING ACT (AS AMENDED BY ACTS II AND Vll 2012 AND III 2014) Edinburgh, 19 May 2007, Sess. I
IV. PROTECTION AGAINST BULLYING ACT (AS AMENDED BY ACTS II AND Vll 2012 AND III 2014) Edinburgh, 19 May 2007, Sess. I The General Assembly hereby enact and ordain as follows: 1. For the purposes of this
More informationTHE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG NATIONAL UNION OF MINEWORKERS
THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG Not reportable Case no: J 1607/17 NATIONAL UNION OF MINEWORKERS Applicant and PETRA DIAMONDS t/a CULLINAN DIAMOND MINE (PTY) LTD Respondent Heard: 2 August
More informationEASTERN CAPE SOCIETY OF ADVOCATES JUDGMENT. 1] This is an application to have the respondent s name struck off the roll
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE PORT ELIZABETH) In the matter between: Case No.: 2232/2011 Date heard: 23 March 2012 Date delivered: 20 August 2012 EASTERN CAPE SOCIETY OF ADVOCATES Applicant
More informationFORM A FILING SHEET FOR EASTERN CAPE JUDGMENT
FORM A FILING SHEET FOR EASTERN CAPE JUDGMENT 023/2005 PARTIES: Van Eyk v Minister of Correctional Services & Others ECJ NO : REFERENCE NUMBERS - Registrar: 125/05 DATE HEARD: 31 March 2005 DATE DELIVERED:
More informationIN THE STUDENT COURT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF STELLENBOSCH (HELD IN STELLENBOSCH) 30 August In the matter between: Kerwin Cameron Jacobs
IN THE STUDENT COURT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF STELLENBOSCH (HELD IN STELLENBOSCH) 30 August 2017 In the matter between: Kerwin Cameron Jacobs Applicant And 2016/2017 Huis Visser Primarius 1 st Respondent 2016/2017
More informationENOCH MGIJIMA LOCAL MUNICIPALITY MILOWO TRADING ENTERPRISE JUDGMENT. [1] This is an opposed application brought on urgency for the suspension of
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN CASE NO: 528/2018 Date Heard: 29 May 2018 Date Delivered: 12 June 2018 In the matter between: ENOCH MGIJIMA LOCAL MUNICIPALITY Applicant
More informationTHE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT. MICHAEL KAWALYA-KAGWA Applicant
THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT Not reportable Case no: J 2406/16 In the matter between: MICHAEL KAWALYA-KAGWA Applicant and DEVELOPMENT BANK OF SOUTHERN AFRICA Respondent Heard:
More informationEASTERN CAPE HIGH COURT: PORT ELIZABETH
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE HIGH COURT: PORT ELIZABETH CASE NO: 1723/07 Heard on: 17/06/11 Delivered on: 02/08/11 In the matter between: STEVE VORSTER First Applicant MATTHYS JOHANNES
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (TRANSVAAL PROVINCIAL DIVISION)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (TRANSVAAL PROVINCIAL DIVISION) Date: 21/08/2008 Case No: 21803/2004 UNREPORTABLE In the case between: RIENA CHARLES Applicant And PREMIER OF THE PROVINCE OF MPULALANGA
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, PORT ELIZABETH. CASE NO: 4305 / 2017 Date heard: 26 June 2018 Date delivered: 31 July 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, PORT ELIZABETH CASE NO: 4305 / 2017 Date heard: 26 June 2018 Date delivered: 31 July 2018 In the matter between JUNE KORKIE JUNE KORKIE N.O. JACK
More informationJayasinghe V. The Attorney General And Others file:///c:/documents and Settings/kapilan/My Documents/Google Talk...
1 of 9 4/19/2011 3:18 PM JAYASINGHE v. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND OTHERS 74 SUPREME COURT. FERNANDO, J. PERERA, J. AND WIJETUNGA, J. S.C. APPLICATION N0. 86/94 OCTOBER 3, 1994. Fundamental Rights Prolonged
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN) CASE NO: 4512/14. Date heard: 04 December 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN) CASE NO: 4512/14 Date heard: 04 December 2014 Judgment Delivered: 11 December 2014 In the matter between: SIBUYA GAME RESERVE & LODGE
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA NORTHERN CAPE DIVISION, KIMBERLEY
Reportable: YES/ NO Circulate to Judges: YES/ NO Circulate to Magistrates: YES/ NO Circulate to Regional Magistrates: YES/ NO In the matter between: IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA NORTHERN CAPE DIVISION,
More informationSamuel G. Momanyi v Attorney General & another [2012] eklr REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS)
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS) Petition 341 of 2011 SAMUEL G. MOMANYI..PETITIONER VERSUS THE HON. ATTORNEY GENERAL..... 1ST RESPONDENT SDV TRANSAMI KENYA LTD....2ND
More informationTHE SCHOOL'S IVIANAGER
. THE HIGH COURT OF SWAZILAND FUTHI P. DLAMINI Applicant And THE TEACHING SERVICE COMMISSION 1 st Respondent THE SCHOOL'S IVIANAGER 2 nd Respondent THE HEADTEACHER NKILIJI SECONDARY SCHOOL 3 rd Respondent
More informationTHE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, IN JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA Not reportable THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, IN JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT CASE NO: D 623/14 In the matter between: JUMBO CASH & CARRY (PTY) LTD Applicants and SOUTH AFRICAN COMMERCIAL,
More informationCLERGY DISCIPLINE STATUTE
- 260 CLERGY DISCIPLINE STATUTE To provide for the maintenance of due order and discipline among the clergy of the Diocese, and to guard against errors of Doctrine WHEREAS it is expedient to provide for
More information64/ REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH GAUTENG, PRETORIA) Case no: 38791/2011. In the matter between:
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA (1) REPORTABLE: YES / (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/fc^ (3) REVISED. yp 64/ Date it;- IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH GAUTENG, PRETORIA) Case no: 38791/2011 In
More informationJUDGMENT. [1] This is an application launched on 24 June 2016 in which applicant seeks, inter alia, the following relief:
1 NOT REPORTABLE IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN) In the matter between Case no: 2981/2016 Date heard: 16 February 2017 Date delivered: LAZOLA NOGODUKA Applicant vs
More informationEASTERN CAPE HIGH COURT: MTHATHA CASE NO: 2743/11 SAKHELE PRECIOUS NKUME. FIRST NATONAL BANK Respondent JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE HIGH COURT: MTHATHA CASE NO: 2743/11 Heard on: 06/03/12 Delivered on: 15/03/12 In the matter between: SAKHELE PRECIOUS NKUME Applicant and FIRSTRAND BANK
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA NORTHERN CAPE HIGH COURT, KIMBERLEY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA NORTHERN CAPE HIGH COURT, KIMBERLEY Case No: 580/11 Date of Hearing: 27.05.2011 Date Delivered: 17.06.2011 In the matter between: BABEREKI CONSULTING ENGINEERS (PTY) LIMITED
More informationIN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA SITTING IN DURBAN REPORTABLE CASE NO D71/05 DATE HEARD 2005/02/11 DATE OF JUDGMENT 2005/02/21
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA SITTING IN DURBAN REPORTABLE CASE NO D71/05 DATE HEARD 2005/02/11 DATE OF JUDGMENT 2005/02/21 In the matter between H W JONKER APPLICANT and OKHAHLAMBA MUNICIPALITY
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN CASE NO. 259/2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN CASE NO. 259/2018 In the matter between: SANGO MAVUSO Applicant and MRS MDAYI/CHAIRPERSON PICARDY COMMUNAL FARM COMMITTEE RESIDENTS
More informationRepublic of South Africa IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN) CASH CRUSADERS FRANCHISING (PTY) LTD
Republic of South Africa IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN) In the matter between: Case No: 1052/2013 2970/2013 CASH CRUSADERS FRANCHISING (PTY) LTD Applicant v LUVHOMBA
More informationof a rule nisi, sought by the Applicants and granted by
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA NATAL PROVINCIAL DIVISION CASE NO. 161/2001 In the matter between: NAUGIS INVESTMENTS CC G N H OFFICE AUTOMATION CC First Applicant Second Applicant and THE KWAZULU- NATAL
More informationCOURT OF APPEAL RULES 2009
COURT OF APPEAL RULES 2009 Court of Appeal Rules 2009 Arrangement of Rules COURT OF APPEAL RULES 2009 Arrangement of Rules Rule PART I - PRELIMINARY 7 1 Citation and commencement... 7 2 Interpretation....
More informationIN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD AT DURBAN
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD AT DURBAN CASE NO. D460/08 In the matter between: SHAUN SAMSON Applicant and THE COMMISSION FOR CONCILIATION, MEDIATION AND ARBITRATION First Respondent ALMEIRO
More informationMaking a Complaint Against Members of the Institute of Certified Public Accountants In Ireland
Making a Complaint Against Members of the Institute of Certified Public Accountants In Ireland INDEX Introduction 3 How the Institute can help you 3 Relationship with your CPA 3 Making a complaint to the
More informationPRELIMINARY DETERMINATION IN TERMS OF SECTION 30J OF THE PENSION FUNDS ACT OF 1956
IN THE TRIBUNAL OF THE PENSION FUNDS ADJUDICATOR In the complaint between: CASE NO: PFA/NP/140/99/KM BUTANA EDWARD MANZINI Complainant and METRO GROUP RETIREMENT FUND METCASH TRADING LIMITED First Respondent
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA KWA-ZULU NATAL LOCAL DIVISION, DURBAN
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA KWA-ZULU NATAL LOCAL DIVISION, DURBAN In the matter between: CASE NO.: 11174/15 NAYESAN REDDY Applicant And LERENDAREN REDDY SHERIFF OF THE COURT, DURBAN COASTAL SHERIFF
More informationIN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD AT JOHANNESBURG CASE NO : JR 161/06 SOUTH AFRICAN POLICE SERVICES
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD AT JOHANNESBURG CASE NO : JR 161/06 In the matter between : SOUTH AFRICAN POLICE SERVICES APPLICANT and SUPT F H LUBBE FIRST RESPONDENT THE SAFETY AND SECURITY
More informationIN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG Not Reportable Case no: J 965/18 In the matter between: SOUTH AFRICAN MUNICIPAL WORKERS UNION ( SAMWU ) Applicant and MXOLISI QINA MILTON MYOLWA SIVIWE
More informationDISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES FOR COUNCILLORS
DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES FOR COUNCILLORS TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD 1. LEGISLATIVE 1.1 The Local Government: Municipal Systems Act (Act 32 of 2000) 1.2 Rules of Natural Justice 2. PRE-HEARING PROCEDURES
More informationFORM A FILING SHEET FOR EASTERN CAPE JUDGMENT
FORM A FILING SHEET FOR EASTERN CAPE JUDGMENT ECJ no: 138 PARTIES: RASHAAD SOOMAR APPLICANT and THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE KROON THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS MR ALWYN GRIEBENOW FIRST RESPONDENT SECOND
More informationState of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department
State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department Decided and Entered: December 6, 2018 In the Matter of LORI JO SKLAR, an Attorney. D-150-18 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON MOTION
More informationBOON GUNN HONG Practitioner
NEW ZEALAND LAWYERS AND CONVEYANCERS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2015] NZLCDT 37 LCDT 025/12 IN THE MATTER of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 BETWEEN LEGAL COMPLAINTS REVIEW OFFICER Applicant AND BOON
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE DIVISION GRAHAMSTOWN) CASE NO:3753/2013 DATE HEARD:30/01/2014 DATE DELIVERED: 27/02/2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE DIVISION GRAHAMSTOWN) CASE NO:3753/2013 DATE HEARD:30/01/2014 DATE DELIVERED: 27/02/2014 In the matter between MANTOMBI BOTYA NOMBULELO BOTYA NOMSIMBITHI
More information(HELD AT JOHANNESBURG) CASE NO: D633/11 SOUTH AFRICAN WOMEN AND MINING INVESTMENTS HOLDINGS (PTY) LTD ( SAWIMIH ) JUDGMENT
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (HELD AT JOHANNESBURG) CASE NO: D633/11 In the matter between: NOLUTHANDO LANGENI Applicant and SOUTH AFRICAN WOMEN AND MINING INVESTMENTS HOLDINGS (PTY) LTD ( SAWIMIH
More informationPowers of the inspectorate to close a working place
Powers of the inspectorate to close a working place Mine and Occupational Health and Safety 2010 Portions compiled by Willem Le Roux a director of Brink Cohen Le Roux Inc. Updated, supplied and presented
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE HIGH COURT: MTHATHA CASE NO: 2248/12. Heard on: 02/09/13. Delivered on: 26/09/13 REPORTABLE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE HIGH COURT: MTHATHA CASE NO: 2248/12 Heard on: 02/09/13 Delivered on: 26/09/13 REPORTABLE In the matter between: SIWAPHIWE MAGWENTSHU Plaintiff and MINISTER
More informationBERMUDA RULES OF THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR BERMUDA BX 1 / 1965
QUO FA T A F U E R N T BERMUDA RULES OF THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR BERMUDA BX 1 / 1965 [made under section 9 of the Court of Appeal Act 1964 and brought into operation on 2 August 1965] TABLE OF CONTENTS
More informationEXCLUSIVE ACCESS TRADING 73 (PTY) LTD JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE HIGH COURT GRAHAMSTOWN) In the matter between: CASE NO: 3829/2009 DATE HEARD: 28/02/2011 DATE DELIVERED: 01/03/2011 EXCLUSIVE ACCESS TRADING 73 (PTY) LTD
More informationCONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA. Case CCT 3/03 VOLKSWAGEN OF SOUTH AFRICA (PTY) LTD JUDGMENT
CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA Case CCT 3/03 XINWA and 1335 OTHERS Applicants versus VOLKSWAGEN OF SOUTH AFRICA (PTY) LTD Respondent Decided on : 4 April 2003 JUDGMENT THE COURT: [1] The applicants
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN R P JANSEN VAN VUUREN
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN In the matter between:- R P JANSEN VAN VUUREN Case No: 703/2012 Plaintiff and H C REINECKE Defendant JUDGMENT BY: VAN DER MERWE, J HEARD
More informationTHE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, HELD AT JOHANNESBURG
Of interest to other Judges THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, In the matter between: HELD AT JOHANNESBURG Case no: J1746/18 JOHANNESBURG METROPOLITAN BUS SERVICES SOC LTD Applicant and DEMOCRATIC MUNCIPAL
More informationThe Intellectual Property Regulation Board (incorporating The Patent Regulation Board and the Trade Mark Regulation Board)
The Intellectual Property Regulation Board (incorporating The Patent Regulation Board and the Trade Mark Regulation Board) Final Draft Disciplinary Procedure Rules The Patent Regulation Board of the Chartered
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. W.P.(C) No.3245/2002 and CM No.11982/06, 761/07. Date of Decision: 6th August, 2008.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : Railways Act, 1989 W.P.(C) No.3245/2002 and CM No.11982/06, 761/07 Date of Decision: 6th August, 2008 M.K. SHARMA.. Petitioner Through : Mr. K.N. Kataria,
More informationRepublic of South Africa IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT, CAPE TOWN) MR VIDEO (PTY) LTD...Applicant / Respondent
Republic of South Africa IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT, CAPE TOWN) In the matter between: CASE NO: 18783/2011 MR VIDEO (PTY) LTD...Applicant / Respondent and BROADWAY DVD CITY
More informationTHE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, HELD AT JOHANNESBURG
THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, HELD AT JOHANNESBURG Of interest to other judges Case No: J 580/18 In the matter between: AUBREY NDINANNYI TSHIVHANDEKANO Applicant and MINISTER OF MINERAL RESOURCES THE
More informationQUANTITY SURVEYORS (REGISTRATION, ETC.) ACT
QUANTITY SURVEYORS (REGISTRATION, ETC.) ACT SECTION ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS Quantity Surveyors Registration Board of Nigeria 1. Establishment of Quantity Surveyors Registration Board of Nigeria, etc. 2.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA KWAZULU-NATAL LOCAL DIVISION, DURBAN SIVAPRAGASEN KRISHANAMURTHI NAIDU
SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA KWAZULU-NATAL
More informationTHE REGIONAL MAGISTRATE, MS J JACOBS JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN) In the matter between: CASE NO.: 1831/2015 PHUMLANI MKOLO ZINTLE NKUHLU NOSIPHIWO MATI MPINDO S EMERGENCE AND TRAINING SERVICES CC
More informationThe Patent Regulation Board and The Trade Mark Regulation Board. Disciplinary Procedure Rules
The Patent Regulation Board and The Trade Mark Regulation Board Disciplinary Procedure Rules The Patent Regulation Board of the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys and the Trade Mark Regulation Board
More informationCODE OF CONDUCT AND DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURE IN TERMS OF COPE S POLICIES AND CONSTITUTION AS AMENDED IN JANUARY 2014.
CODE OF CONDUCT AND DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURE IN TERMS OF COPE S POLICIES AND CONSTITUTION AS AMENDED IN JANUARY 2014. The purpose of this Policy is to bring uniformity to the internal disciplinary procedures
More informationTrade Disputes Act Ch. 48:02
ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS SECTION VOLUME: X TRADE DISPUTES CHAPTER: 48:02 PART I Preliminary 1. Short title 2. Interpretation PART II Establishment of panel and procedure for settlement of trade disputes
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV 2009-02708 BETWEEN SYDNEY ORR APPLICANT AND THE POLICE SERVICE COMMISSION DEFENDANT Before the Honourable Mr. Justice A. des Vignes
More informationTHE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG
THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG Not reportable Case no J 633/16 In the matter between GEORGE MAKUKAU Applicant And RAMOTSHERE MOILOA LOCAL MUNICIPALITY First Respondent THOMPSON PHAKALANE
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE CIRCUIT COURT, EAST LONDON) BLUE NIGHTINGALE TRADING 397 (PTY) LTD t/a SIYENZA GROUP
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE CIRCUIT COURT, EAST LONDON) REPORTABLE CASE NO. EL881/15 ECD 1681/15 In the matter between: BLUE NIGHTINGALE TRADING 397 (PTY) LTD t/a SIYENZA GROUP Applicant
More informationSALGBC Disciplinary Code Collective Agreement Quick Reference Guide
SALGBC Disciplinary Code Collective Agreement Quick Reference Guide Overview This purpose of this document is to provide, managers, supervisors, employees, shop stewards and union officials with a Quick
More informationTHE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (HELD AT JOHANNESBURG) JOHANNESBURG CITY PARKS ADVOCATE JAFTA MPHAHLANI N.O.
THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (HELD AT JOHANNESBURG) In the matter between: CASE NO. JR 1028/06 JOHANNESBURG CITY PARKS Applicant And ADVOCATE JAFTA MPHAHLANI N.O. THE SOUTH AFRICAN LOCAL GOVERNMENT
More informationCHAPTER 20 RULE DISCIPLINE AND DISABILITY: POLICY JURISDICTION
PROPOSED CHANGES TO COLORADO RULES OF PROCEDURE REGARDING ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE AND DISABILITY PROCEEDINGS, COLORADO ATTORNEYS FUND FOR CLIENT PROTECTION, AND COLORADO RULE OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT 1.15 The
More informationDISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE COLLEGE OF NURSES OF ONTARIO
DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE COLLEGE OF NURSES OF ONTARIO This decision was followed by an appeal, the results of which can be found at the end of this document. PANEL: Sarah Corkey, RN Chairperson Susan
More informationIN THE NATIONAL CONSUMER TRIBUNAL, HELD AT PRETORIA
national consumer tribunal IN THE NATIONAL CONSUMER TRIBUNAL, HELD AT PRETORIA Case No.: NCT/09/2008/57(1) (P) In the matter between SHOSHOLOZA FINANCE CC Applicant And NATIONAL CREDIT REGULATOR Respondent
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA. AAA INVESTMENTS PROPRIETARY LIMITED Applicant. PETER MARK HUGO NO First Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA NOT REPORTABLE EASTERN CAPE, GRAHAMSTOWN Case No.: 2088/10 & 2089/10 Date Heard: 19 August 2010 Date Delivered:16 September 2010 In the matters between: AAA INVESTMENTS
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT, CAPE TOWN) CASE NO: In the matter between: MINISTER OF POLICE.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT, CAPE TOWN) In the matter between: CASE NO: MINISTER OF POLICE NATIONAL COMMISSIONER OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN POLICE SERVICE THE PROVINCIAL COMMISSIONER
More informationAVENG (AFRICA) LIMITED J U D G M E N T. summons. On 17 June 2009 the plaintiff issued summons against the
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE, PORT ELIZABETH) CASE NO. 1613/09 In the matter between: AVENG (AFRICA) LIMITED Plaintiff and VARICOR SIX (PTY) LIMITED t/a SIGMA CONSULTING Defendant J
More information7 01 THE WORKFORCE GROUP (PTY) (LTD) A...
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA NORTH GAUTENG, PRETORIA Case number 57110/2011 In the matter of THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR THE COMPENSATION COMMISSIONER First Applicant
More informationREVELAS J : IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (Held at Johannesburg ) Case. No: J2258/98 In the matter between :
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (Held at Johannesburg ) Delete whichever is not applicable: Reportable : yes / no Of interest to other Judges: yes / no Revised 30 April 1999 Signature No: J2258/98
More informationKENTZ OVERSEAS LTD APPLICANT. G A McGILLAN RESPONDENT JUDGMENT
IN THE KWAZULU-NATAL HIGH COURT, DURBAN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA CASE NO: 11384/2010 In the matter between: KENTZ OVERSEAS LTD APPLICANT and G A McGILLAN RESPONDENT JUDGMENT Date: 12 November 2011 PLOOS
More informationTHE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, IN JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA Reportable THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, IN JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT Case no: J1773/12 In the matter between: VUSI MASHIANE and DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Applicant First Respondent
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA THE MEC: DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, ECONOMIC SCHOON GODWILLY MAHUMANI
+ THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA In the matter between THE MEC: DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, ECONOMIC AFFAIRS AND TOURISM: CASE NO: 478/03 Reportable NORTHERN PROVINCE APPELLANT and SCHOON GODWILLY
More informationIN THE INDUSTRIAL COURT OF SWAZILAND JUDGEMENT
IN THE INDUSTRIAL COURT OF SWAZILAND JUDGEMENT Case NO. 418/12 In the matter between: SIPHO DLAMINI Applicant And THE TEACHING SERVICE COMMISSION SWAZILAND GOVERNMENT THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL 1 st Respondent
More informationLABOUR COURT RULES, 2017 ARRANGEMENT OF RULES PART I PRELIMINARY
Statutory Instrument 150 of 2017 LABOUR COURT RULES, 2017 SI 150/2017, 8/2018. ARRANGEMENT OF RULES PART I PRELIMINARY Rule 1. Title. 2. Application. 3. Interpretation. 4. Computation of time and certain
More informationTHE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT
THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT Not reportable Case no: JR 1906/2016 In the matter between ELIZABETH LEE MING Applicant and MMI GROUP LTD KAREN DE VILLIERS N.O. First Respondent
More informationPOWERS AND PRIVILEGES (SENATE AND HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY) ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS
[CH.8 1 CHAPTER 8 (SENATE AND HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY) SECTION ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PRELIMINARY 1. Short title. 2. Interpretation. PART II PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF SENATORS AND MEMBERS 3. General
More informationPARLIAMENT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA ARBITRATION ACT NO. 11 OF 1995
PARLIAMENT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA ARBITRATION ACT NO. 11 OF 1995 (Certified on 30 th June-1995) Arbitration Act. No. 11 of 1995 1 (Certified on 30 th June-1995) L.D. O.10/93
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH GAUTENG, PRETORIA)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH GAUTENG, PRETORIA) Case No: 8550/09 Date heard: 06/08/2009 Date of judgment: 11/08/2009 In the matter between: Pikoli, Vusumzi Patrick Applicant and The President
More informationTHE PUNJAB EMPLOYEES EFFICIENCY, DISCIPLINE AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
1 of 9 17/03/2011 13:53 THE PUNJAB EMPLOYEES EFFICIENCY, DISCIPLINE AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT 2006 (Act XII of 2006) C O N T E N T S SECTIONS 1. Short title, extent, commencement and application. 2. Definitions.
More information(7 June to date) POWERS, PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF PARLIAMENT AND PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURES ACT 4 OF 2004
(7 June 2004 - to date) [This is the current version and applies as from 7 June 2004, i.e. the date of commencement of the Powers, Privileges and Immunities of Parliament and Provincial Legislatures Act
More informationIN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD IN JOHANNESBURG
1 IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD IN JOHANNESBURG In the matter between: Case no: J812\07 NIREN INDARDAV SINGH Applicant and SA RAIL COMMUTER CORPORATION LTD t\a METRORAIL Respondent JUDGMENT
More informationSaudi Center for Commercial Arbitration King Fahad Branch Rd, Al Mutamarat, Riyadh, KSA PO Box 3758, Riyadh Tel:
SCCA Arbitration Rules Shaaban 1437 - May 2016 Saudi Center for Commercial Arbitration King Fahad Branch Rd, Al Mutamarat, Riyadh, KSA PO Box 3758, Riyadh 11481 Tel: 920003625 info@sadr.org www.sadr.org
More informationTHE DISTRICT AND INTERMEDIATE COURTS (CIVIL JURISDICTION) ACT 1888
THE DISTRICT AND INTERMEDIATE COURTS (CIVIL JURISDICTION) ACT 1888 Act 34/1852 LANE CAP 173 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I - PRELIMINARY 1. Short title 2. Interpretation 3. Recovery of cost of sewerage
More informationIN THE NORTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT, PRETORIA [REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA]
IN THE NORTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT, PRETORIA [REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA] CASE NUMBER: 44933/2014 DATE: 18 SEPTEMBER 2013 NOT REPORTABLE NOT OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES In the matter between: FREDERICK WILLEM
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG CASE NO: 30037/2015 (1) REPORTABLE: YES / NO (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO (3) REVISED... DATE...
More informationLabour Court Rules, 2006 ARRANGEMENT OF RULES PART I
DISTRIBUTED BY VERITAS TRUST Tel: [263] [4] 794478 Fax & Messages [263] [4] 793592 E-mail: veritas@mango.zw VERITAS MAKES EVERY EFFORT TO ENSURE THE PROVISION OF RELIABLE INFORMATION, BUT CANNOT TAKE LEGAL
More informationUNRWA DISPUTE TRIBUNAL
UNRWA DISPUTE TRIBUNAL Case No.: UNRWA/DT/JFO/2014/052 Date: 21 December 2015 Original: English Before: Registry: Registrar: Judge Jean-François Cousin Amman Laurie McNabb APPLICANT v. COMMISSIONER GENERAL
More information1. Words underlined with a solid line ( ) indicate the insertions in the existing rules.
APPROVED AMENDMENTS TO THE JSE EQUITIES RULES General explanatory notes: 1. Words underlined with a solid line ( ) indicate the insertions in the existing rules. 2. Words in bold and in square brackets
More informationClergy Discipline Measure
873165A01A 14-07-03 17:03:29 Unit: PAGA [SO] Pag Table: NACTA 29.1.2001, Measure CONTENTS Introductory 1 Duty to have regard to bishop s role 2 Disciplinary tribunals 3 Clergy Discipline Commission 4 President
More informationCLERGY DISCIPLINE MEASURE 2003 as amended by the Clergy Discipline (Amendment) Measure 2013 and the Safeguarding and Clergy Discipline Measure 2016
CLERGY DISCIPLINE MEASURE 2003 as amended by the Clergy Discipline (Amendment) Measure 2013 and the Safeguarding and Clergy Discipline Measure 2016 CONTENTS Introductory 1 Duty to have regard to bishop
More informationTHE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG
THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG Not Reportable Case no: J2689/2018 In the matter between: RAKWENA REGINALD MPHO MONARENG Applicant and MINISTER OF ARTS & CULTURE First Respondent PAN SOUTH
More informationDraft Safeguarding and Clergy Discipline Measure
GS 192A Draft Safeguarding and Clergy Discipline Measure CONTENTS Safeguarding children and vulnerable adults 1 Clergy: suspension 2 Churchwardens: disqualification and suspension 3 Parochial church council
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN BRIAN MOORE. And PUBLIC SERVICES CREDIT UNION CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV 2010-03257 BETWEEN BRIAN MOORE Claimant And PUBLIC SERVICES CREDIT UNION CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED Defendant Before the Honourable
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Case no: 162/10 In the matter between: THE COMMISSIONER FOR THE SOUTH AFRICAN REVENUE SERVICE and SAIRA ESSA PRODUCTIONS CC SAIRA ESSA MARK CORLETT
More information