IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA 
GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA
Case No: 12758/2014
Date heard: 25 November 2014
Date of judgment: 25 November 2014
Not reportable
Not of interest to other judges

MOTOR INDUSTRY STAFF ASSOCIATION......................................................Applicant
and
IAN ANTHONY MACUN N.O. …...................................................................1st Respondent
MINISTER OF LABOUR N.O. …...................................................................2nd Respondent
MOTOR INDUSTRY BARGAINING COUNCIL..........................................3rd Respondent
NATIONAL UNION OF METALWORKERS OF SOUTH
AFRICA................................................................................................................4th Respondent
RETAIL MOTOR INDUSTRY ORGANISATION.........................................5th Respondent
FUEL RETAILERS’ ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHERN
AFRICA...............................................................................................................6th Respondent
LEAVE TO APPEAL JUDGMENT
[1] This is a leave to appeal against the judgment and order I granted on 06 November 2014.1
[2] The concurrent jurisdiction created by the provisions of section 157(1) and (2) of the Labour Relations Act (LRA) had a grappling history which now appears to be in perpetuity.
[3] Section 17 (1) (a) (ii) of Superior Court Act 10 of 2013 (the Act) provides that ‘[l]eave to appeal may only be given where the judge or judges concerned are of the opinion that
(a)(i) ...
(ii) there is some other compelling reason why the appeal should be heard, including conflicting judgments on the matter under consideration;’
[4] Section 20 provides ‘[wjhenever a decision on a question of law is given by a court of a Division which is in conflict with a decision on the same question of law given by a court of any other Division, the Minister may submit such conflicting decisions to the Chief Justice, who must cause the matter to be argued before the Constitutional Court or the Supreme Court of Appeal, as the case may be, in order to determine the said question of law for guidance.’
[5] The conflicting judgments from different courts referred to in the main judgment warrant the granting of leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal or; the Minister may submit the said conflicting decisions to the Chief Justice, who must cause the matter to be argued before the Constitutional Court to settle this concurrent jurisdiction issue created by the Labour Relations Act.
The following order is thus made.
Order:
1. Leave to appeal is hereby granted to the Supreme Court of Appeal.
2. Costs of this application be costs in the appeal.
A.M.L. Phatudi 
Judge of the High Court
On behalf of the Applicant: Gerrie Ebersohn
C/O Kritzinger Attorneys 
1181 Church Street 
Hatfield 
Pretoria
Dr G Ebersohn
On behalf of the lst and 2nd
Respondent: State Attorney
SALU Building
316 Thabo Sehume Street
Pretoria
No appearance
On behalf of 3rd Respondent: Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyer Inc
C/O Gildenhuys Malatji Inc 
GMI House 
Harlequins Office Park 
164 Totius Street 
Groenkloof 
Pretoria
No appearance
On behalf of the 4th Respondent: Haffegee Roskam Savage
C/O Macrobbert Inc 
Cnr Justice Mohamed &  
Jan Shoba Streets 
Brooklyn 
Pretoria
No appearance
1Due to typographical errors I noticed at paragraphs [5] and [6] and footnote 15, i annexe the amended version for ease of reference