AGRICULTURAL LABOUR BUREAU & ANOR v ZIMBABWE AGRO-INDUSTRY WORKERS UNION 1998 (2) ZLR 196 (S)

Flynote

Employment — trade union — C application for registration — existing registered trade union in the same sector — criteria that Registrar must take into account in deciding whether second union should be registered

Headnote

An unregistered trade union in the agricultural sector (ZAWU) applied to the Registrar of Labour Relations to become registered in terms of the Labour Relations Act [Chapter 28:01]. A trade union which was already registered in the agricultural sector (GAPWUZ), and a registered employers' organisation, opposed this application on several grounds. The main objection of GAPWUZ was that it was already effectively representing the agricultural workers concerned and the registration of ZAWU would not benefit the workers in question.

After holding accreditation proceedings, the E Registrar decided that ZAWU should be granted registration. GAPWUZ appealed against this decision to the Labour Relations Tribunal. This appeal was unsuccessful. GAPWUZ then appealed to the Supreme Court against the decision of the Labour Relations Tribunal.

Held, that whether it was desirable to have more than one trade union in a particular industry is fundamentally a matter of policy. The Registrar is given power to determine this issue. The factors that he is required to take into account in deciding this matter are set out in s 45 of the Labour Relations Act and in terms of s 44 of the Act he is obliged to give reasons for his decision. The reasons given must be reasonable.

Held, further, that the only basis upon which the court can normally interfere with the exercise of this decision making power is if the Registrar had failed to conduct himself in the manner prescribed by the Labour Relations Act and has improperly exercised his discretion.

Held, further, that the brief reasons given by the Registrar were such that it was not possible to determine whether he had properly exercised his discretion. A number of important salient questions were left unanswered. Thesequestions were also left unanswered in the appeal to the Labour Relations Tribunal and the Labour Relations Tribunal had given insufficient consideration to whether the Registrar had correctly exercised his discretion in terms of s 45 of the Labour Relations Act.

Held, therefore, that because the Registrar had failed to exercise his discretion correctly, his decision should be set aside, together with the decision by the Labour Relations Tribunal, and the matter remitted to the Registrar for reconsideration in the light of the points raised by the Supreme Court.

Cases cited

Continental Fashions (Pvt) Ltd v Mupfuririri & Ors 1997 (2) ZLR 405 (S)

Dir of Civil Aviation v Hall 1990 (2) ZLR 354 (S)

Metal & Allied Workers Union v Min of Manpower 1983 (3) SA 238 (N)

National Foods Ltd v Magadza S-105-95

Paper, Printing, Wood & Allied Workers' Union v Pienaar NO 1993 (4) SA 621 (A)

S v Mohamed 1977 (2) SA 531 (T)

Tickly & Ors v Johannes NO & Ors 1963 (2) SA 588 (T)