A B Murray & Associates v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (J3014/99) [2002] ZALC 118 (11 February 2002)

A B Murray & Associates v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (J3014/99) [2002] ZALC 118 (11 February 2002)

The court held that the respondent failed to comply with the clear terms of Jammy AJ's order, which required any application for rescission and condonation to be brought within 21 days. No formal application for condonation was filed, and no proper explanation was provided for the delay. The court rejected the argument that condonation could be implied or that the matter should be referred to oral evidence. The Labour Court also found it had no jurisdiction to rescind a previous order on the grounds of vagueness or unenforceability in the absence of proper grounds. Consequently, the respondent was barred from bringing the rescission application.

Citation
[2002] ZALC 118
Parties
Applicant: A B Murray & Associates; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 February 2002
Case Number
J3014/99
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Rescission and Condonation Following Previous Order; Hearing on Compliance and Admissibility.
Outcome
Application for rescission and condonation is barred due to non-compliance with the previous court order.
Judges
E Revelas
Legal Topics
Rescission of Judgment, Condonation, Compliance With Court Order
Labour Law Civil Procedure Rescission of Judgment Condonation Compliance With Court Order

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A B Murray & Associates

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Rescission and Condonation Following Previous Order; Hearing on Compliance and Admissibility.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent is barred from bringing the rescission application due to non-compliance with the previous court order.
  2. 2 Whether condonation for late filing of the rescission application can be granted without a formal application.
  3. 3 Whether the Labour Court can rescind a previous order on grounds of vagueness or unenforceability.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the respondent failed to comply with the clear terms of Jammy AJ's order, which required any application for rescission and condonation to be brought within 21 days. No formal application for condonation was filed, and no proper explanation was provided for the delay. The court rejected the argument that condonation could be implied or that the matter should be referred to oral evidence. The Labour Court also found it had no jurisdiction to rescind a previous order on the grounds of vagueness or unenforceability in the absence of proper grounds. Consequently, the respondent was barred from bringing the rescission application.

Court Disposition

Application for rescission and condonation is barred due to non-compliance with the previous court order.

Orders

  • The respondent is barred from bringing the application for rescission.
  • The applicant is to pay the respondent’s costs or expenses, if any.