Basson v Breedevallei Plaaslike Munisipaliteit en Anders (C751/2016) [2017] ZALCCT 72 (29 August 2017)

Basson v Breedevallei Plaaslike Munisipaliteit en Anders (C751/2016) [2017] ZALCCT 72 (29 August 2017)

The court found that the arbitrator properly considered the length and reasons for the delay, which was exceptionally long at 547 days. The main reason advanced was the union's failure to act timeously, but the applicant continued to pursue internal grievances instead of referring the dispute. The arbitrator applied the correct legal principles and exercised her discretion reasonably in refusing condonation. The court held that the arbitrator's decision was not unreasonable and that another arbitrator could have reached the same conclusion. Accordingly, the review application was dismissed.

Citation
[2017] ZALCCT 72
Parties
Applicant: Mannie Basson; Respondent: Breedevallei Plaaslike Munisipaliteit; Respondent: A Singh-Bhoopchand; Respondent: Suid-Afrikaanse Plaaslike Regering Bedingingsraad
Court
Labour Court Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 August 2017
Case Number
C751/2016
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of Condonation Refusal
Outcome
The review application is dismissed.
Judges
Steenkamp R
Legal Topics
Condonation, Late Referral, Review of Arbitration Award, Union Delay
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Late Referral Review of Arbitration Award Union Delay

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mannie Basson

Applicant

Breedevallei Plaaslike Munisipaliteit

Respondent

A Singh-Bhoopchand

Respondent

Suid-Afrikaanse Plaaslike Regering Bedingingsraad

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of Condonation Refusal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrator's refusal to grant condonation for the late referral of the dispute was reasonable.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in referral, primarily caused by the applicant's union, justified condonation.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator properly exercised her discretion in refusing condonation.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the arbitrator properly considered the length and reasons for the delay, which was exceptionally long at 547 days. The main reason advanced was the union's failure to act timeously, but the applicant continued to pursue internal grievances instead of referring the dispute. The arbitrator applied the correct legal principles and exercised her discretion reasonably in refusing condonation. The court held that the arbitrator's decision was not unreasonable and that another arbitrator could have reached the same conclusion. Accordingly, the review application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

The review application is dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for review is dismissed.