Bolton v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1113/14) [2018] ZALCJHB 272 (24 August 2018)

Bolton v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1113/14) [2018] ZALCJHB 272 (24 August 2018)

The applicant failed to provide a reasonable and cogent explanation for the six-month delay in referring his unfair dismissal dispute to the CCMA, as he was aware of the time limits and only acted after his pension benefits were withheld and a civil claim was instituted against him. The referral was found to be an...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] ZALCJHB 272
Parties
Applicant: Vaughn Morgan Bolton; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Zakhele Mhlambo N.O; Respondent: Shoprite Checkers (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 August 2018
Case Number
JR1113/14
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Condonation is refused and the review application is dismissed with costs.
Judges
P. Sedile
Legal Topics
Condonation for Late Referral, Unfair Dismissal, Review of Arbitration Award, Jurisdiction of Ccma
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation for Late Referral Unfair Dismissal Review of Arbitration Award Jurisdiction of Ccma

Source-derived case record

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 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vaughn Morgan Bolton

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Zakhele Mhlambo N.O

Respondent

Shoprite Checkers (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant provided a reasonable and cogent explanation for the late referral of his unfair dismissal dispute.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant demonstrated prospects of success in challenging his dismissal.
  3. 3 Whether the prejudice to the applicant outweighed any prejudice to the third respondent.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to provide a reasonable and cogent explanation for the six-month delay in referring his unfair dismissal dispute to the CCMA, as he was aware of the time limits and only acted after his pension benefits were withheld and a civil claim was instituted against him. The referral was found to be an afterthought, and the applicant did not demonstrate any prospects of success or establish any gross irregularity or unreasonableness in the commissioner's decision. The CCMA's jurisdiction is limited to matters within the LRA, and the applicant's reasons for delay did not fall within its jurisdiction. Accordingly, condonation was refused and the review application dismissed.

Court Disposition

Condonation is refused and the review application is dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Condonation is refused.
  • The review application is dismissed.