AMCU v DHL Supply Chain and Another (JS19/17) [2018] ZALCJHB 40 (7 February 2018)

AMCU v DHL Supply Chain and Another (JS19/17) [2018] ZALCJHB 40 (7 February 2018)

After considering the grounds for leave to appeal and the written submissions, the court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate any reasonable prospect of success on appeal. The grounds raised were not new and had already been addressed in the initial judgment. No compelling reasons were presented to justify granting leave to appeal. The respondent's condonation application for late filing of submissions was granted as it was unopposed and the explanation was satisfactory. No costs order was made in respect of the application for leave to appeal.

Citation
[2018] ZALCJHB 40
Parties
Applicant: AMCU; Respondent: DHL Supply Chain; Respondent: National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA)
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 February 2018
Case Number
JS 19/17
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Condonation Application and Statement of Defence.
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Judges
Coetzee
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Condonation, Reasonable Prospect of Success, Costs Order
Labour Law Leave to Appeal Condonation Reasonable Prospect of Success Costs 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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AMCU

Applicant

DHL Supply Chain

Respondent

National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Condonation Application and Statement of Defence.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's grounds for leave to appeal demonstrate a reasonable prospect of success.
  2. 2 Whether there are compelling reasons for granting leave to appeal.
  3. 3 Whether condonation for late filing of opposing submissions should be granted.

Ratio Decidendi

After considering the grounds for leave to appeal and the written submissions, the court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate any reasonable prospect of success on appeal. The grounds raised were not new and had already been addressed in the initial judgment. No compelling reasons were presented to justify granting leave to appeal. The respondent's condonation application for late filing of submissions was granted as it was unopposed and the explanation was satisfactory. No costs order was made in respect of the application for leave to appeal.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • There is no order as to costs.