This news aggregator site highlights South African labour news from a wide range of internet and print sources. Each posting has a synopsis of the source article, together with a link or reference to the original. Postings cover the range of labour related matters from industrial relations to generalist human resources.
The Citizen writes that while there is wide enthusiasm and hope pinned on pending legal action to force Eskom and Public Enterprises Minister Pravin Gordhan to end load shedding, legal experts aren’t hopeful, saying it is likely to be a practically futile exercise.
Seven law firms acting on behalf of several organisations, political parties and individuals, have issued a letter of demand, in the first step of a legal battle meant to see load shedding stopped with immediate effect or provision of a full explanation of why government cannot stop it. But according to Dr Llewelyn Curlewis of the University of Pretoria’s Department of Procedural Law, unless the applicants can provide suggestions on how Eskom could end load shedding, the order would not be enforceable. He explained that the principle in law was that a judgment could only be handed down if the court could ensure effective implementation of the order. Curlewis said in theory the court could grant the application, but the problem would be ensuring that government complied with the order to stop load shedding. “Obviously the only remedy in this situation in civil litigation is contempt of court, by asking [Gordhan] or Eskom [CEO Andre De Ruyter] to come and explain to the court why they should not be held accountable and in contempt of court,” he noted. But, Curlewis said Gordhan and De Ruyter were acting in their official capacities, on behalf of their respective institutions, and that no court would throw them in jail because there was nothing they could personally do about the situation. Constitutional law expert Deborah Mutemwa-Tumbo commented that, if the application was successful, “…the implications would be that load shedding must be stopped by government. This, however, would not be immediate because, say the courts find in favour of the applicants, the courts usually give respondents time to implement alternatives. So even if successful, the application would not have an immediate effect.”
- Read the full original of the report in the above regard by Sipho Mabena at The Citizen (subscriber access only)
Get other news reports at the SA Labour News home page