Are you required to interpret any of the following: pre-trial minutes, strike ballot guidelines, the LRA, a separation agreement, a benefits dispute, an arbitration award, the BCEA, a restraint of trade, a traditional disciplinary enquiry charge sheet, the constitution of a trade union, etc?
If so, your understanding of the principles and application adopted by the SCA in Natal Joint Municipal Pension Fund v Endumeni Municipality (2012) 4 SA 593 (SCA) is required.
_____________________________________
The SCA, in Natal Joint Municipal Pension Fund v Endumeni Municipality (supra), adopted the following approach:
- the exercise of interpretation entails attributing meaning to words used in any document, such as legislation, other statutory provisions or a contract;
- the starting point is to read the language of the provision with reference to its context (i e reading the document as a whole), the purpose of the provision, the background to the preparation and production of the document;
- when considering the language, reference must be made to the ordinary rules of grammar and syntax;
- where more than one meaning is possible, each meaning must be weighed with reference to the above factors and a sensible meaning is to be preferred to one that leads to an insensible or unbusinesslike result, or undermines the apparent purpose of the document;
- when interpreting a document, whoever is required to do so must be alert not to substitute what he/she thinks is reasonable, sensible or businesslike for the actual words used; and
- at all times, cognisance must be taken of the fact that the process of interpretation is objective and not subjective.
See, further, Cool Ideas 1186 CC v Hubbard 2014 (4) SA 474 (CC), Democratic Alliance v Speaker, National Assembly 2016 (3) SA 487 (CC) and NUMSA v Chamber of Mines (2017) 38 ILJ 831 (CC).
