Blom and Others v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (D293/21) [2022] ZALCD 19 (21 June 2022)

Blom and Others v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (D293/21) [2022] ZALCD 19 (21 June 2022)

The court found that the applicants' late filing of the record was excusable in the circumstances, particularly given the ambiguity between Rule 7A(6) and clause 11.2.6 of the Practice Manual regarding which portions of the record are necessary. The applicants acted with reasonable speed once alerted to the missing portions and purged their non-compliance before lodging the reinstatement application. The court held that the threshold for prospects of success in reinstatement applications is low and that the applicants met this threshold. The opposition by the third respondent was found to be reasonable, and no costs order was made. The late filing was condoned, and the review application...

Citation
[2022] ZALCD 19
Parties
Applicant: RC Blom; Applicant: BJ Davids; Applicant: RI Nthulane; Applicant: SC Khathi; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: N Green-Thompson N.O; Respondent: Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (PRASA)
Court
Labour Court Durban
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
21 June 2022
Case Number
D293/21
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application for Reinstatement of Withdrawn Review Due to Late Filing of Record
Outcome
Application granted. The late filing of the record is condoned and the review application is reinstated.
Judges
Mhlanga
Legal Topics
Condonation for Late Filing, Practice Manual Clauses, Reinstatement of Review, Prospects of Success, Costs in Labour Court
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation for Late Filing Practice Manual Clauses Reinstatement of Review Prospects of Success Costs in Labour Court

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 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

RC Blom

Applicant

BJ Davids

Applicant

RI Nthulane

Applicant

SC Khathi

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

N Green-Thompson N.O

Respondent

Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (PRASA)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application for Reinstatement of Withdrawn Review Due to Late Filing of Record

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the late filing of the record in the review application should be condoned.
  2. 2 Whether the review application should be reinstated after being deemed withdrawn for non-compliance with the Practice Manual.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants acted reasonably in failing to file the full record within the prescribed period.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants' late filing of the record was excusable in the circumstances, particularly given the ambiguity between Rule 7A(6) and clause 11.2.6 of the Practice Manual regarding which portions of the record are necessary. The applicants acted with reasonable speed once alerted to the missing portions and purged their non-compliance before lodging the reinstatement application. The court held that the threshold for prospects of success in reinstatement applications is low and that the applicants met this threshold. The opposition by the third respondent was found to be reasonable, and no costs order was made. The late filing was condoned, and the review application...

Court Disposition

Application granted. The late filing of the record is condoned and the review application is reinstated.

Orders

  • The late filing of the record in this matter outside the sixty day period provided for in Clause 11.2.2 of the Practice Manual of the Labour Court is condoned.
  • The review application herein is reinstated.