The court noted the municipality had properly anticipated the need for a stay application from the outset of the review proceedings.
Ngqushwa Local Municipality has won permission in the Labour Court in Gqeberha to delay paying a fired employee R700 152 while it challenges the order in court.
Acting Judge Coen De Kock also approved the cash-strapped municipality’s request to provide only R150 000 as security instead of the standard 24-month remuneration requirement.
The municipality disagreed with an arbitration ruling that ordered it to rehire employee B Mangesi and pay him R700 152 in backpay.
Background of the dispute
The case centres on an arbitration award issued by the second respondent, Ntombekhaya Sesani, on 13 May 2025.
The award reinstated employee B Mangesi, represented by the South African Municipal Workers’ Union (Samwu), effective from 26 May 2025.
The municipality was ordered to pay R700 152 in backpay by 23 May 2025.
Ngqushwa Local Municipality filed for review of the award on 20 May 2025, well within the prescribed six-week period.
The municipality immediately flagged its intention to seek a stay of enforcement and permission to provide reduced security.
According to the judgment, the municipality was served with a certified award on 18 June 2025, enabling enforcement proceedings.
ALSO READ: Man sentenced to life for murder of KZN ward councillor
After filing a security bond of R150 000 on 19 June, the municipality’s attorneys requested an undertaking from the employee’s legal team that enforcement would not proceed.
When the seven-day deadline expired on 30 June without response, the employee’s attorney stated the municipality was “at liberty to approach the court on an urgent basis for appropriate relief.”
Court finds application urgent
De Kock ruled that the application was genuinely urgent given the timeline of events.
The court noted the municipality had properly anticipated the need for a stay application from the outset of the review proceedings.
“The applicant’s actions in the way they anticipated the need to ask for a stay and the need to seek an exemption from the security to be furnished in terms of section 145 (8) are commended by this court,” De Kock stated.
ALSO READ: Ex-municipal manager linked to Magaqa’s killing remains behind bars, ANCYL responds
Additionally, the court emphasised that urgency was not self-created by the municipality.
De Kock found that urgency arose only when it became clear the employee would pursue enforcement despite the timely review application and provision of security, albeit at a reduced amount.
Stay of enforcement granted
The court granted the stay application, finding no reason to refuse it given the municipality’s compliance with procedural requirements.
De Kock noted there was no indication that the review proceedings were brought to frustrate the enforcement of the award.
The court accepted that failure to grant the stay would severely prejudice the municipality.
Assets could be attached and sold potentially below market value, while the municipality’s ability to deliver services to residents would be impacted.
“The applicant will suffer irreparable harm if the enforcement of the award is not stayed,” the judgment stated.
ALSO READ: Zuma and MK party case should’ve started in High Court, ConCourt hears [VIDEOS]
The court noted the municipality had conducted a thorough investigation into what security amount it could afford without affecting operations.
This distinguished the case from others where litigants arbitrarily decide on security amounts without justification.
Reduced security approved
De Kock exercised discretion under section 145(7) of the Labour Relations Act to accept the R150 000 security as sufficient.
The court found no reason to reject the municipality’s determination of what it could afford without interrupting constitutional and statutory obligations to provide municipal services.
The judgment referenced section 152(1)(b) of the constitution, which requires municipalities to provide services to communities.
The court was satisfied that the municipality has sufficient assets to comply with the award if the review application fails. It made no order as to costs.
READ NEXT: Cop and prosecutor get bail in R1.6 million extortion case
