By Stef de Gouveia and Keane Robertson BACKGROUND In an application for leave to appeal, the Johannesburg Roads Agency’s (the “JRA”) application was dismissed with costs and Vumacam Proprietary Limited’s (“Vumacam”) application in terms of section 18 of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013 (the “Act”) was granted.  The JRA, discontent with the order
Written by Stef de Gouveia and checked by Mohau Ledwaba Background:  In this matter, the Labour Appel Court (the “Court”) had to determine whether the judgment and order of the Labour Court previously, which dismissed a review application brough by Mr Edward Lemley (the “Appellant”), was correct.  The main issue relates to the third respondent,
By Stefano de Gouveia, Candidate Attorney and Keane Robertson, Partner Background:  The applicant in this matter, Vumacam (Pty) Ltd (“Vumacam“) has over time sought wayleaves from the first respondent, the Johannesburg Road Agency (“JRA“). More recently, however, Vumacam has been unable to secure any wayleaves due to the JRA refusing to consider Vumacam’s wayleave applications.