Brits and Others v Combined Manufacturers National (Pty) Ltd (JS812/2011) [2014] ZALCJHB 321 (26 August 2014)

Brits and Others v Combined Manufacturers National (Pty) Ltd (JS812/2011) [2014] ZALCJHB 321 (26 August 2014)

The court found that the delay in filing the response to the counter-claim was excessive and the explanation provided by the applicants was neither plausible nor reasonable. The first applicant failed to explain the entire period of delay, and reliance on the unavailability of counsel and attorneys was insufficient. The applicants did not demonstrate reasonable prospects of success in the counter-claim, nor did they raise any valid exceptions to the counter-claim. On a conspectus of all the facts and circumstances, the applicants failed to show good cause for condonation, and it was not in the interests of justice to grant the application. Accordingly, the application for condonation was...

Citation
[2014] ZALCJHB 321
Parties
Applicant: Elizabeth Dorathea Brits; Applicant: Helena Marial Bester; Applicant: Kizelle Spohr; Applicant: Miranda Strachan; Applicant: Lindi Bekker; Applicant: Mathew John Matthysen; Respondent: Combined Manufacturers National (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 August 2014
Case Number
JS812/2011
Procedural Posture
Condonation Application / Application for Condonation of Late Filing of Response to Counter Claim
Outcome
Application for condonation of the late filing of the response to the respondent's counter-claim is dismissed.
Judges
Lallie
Legal Topics
Condonation, Late Filing, Counter Claim, Unfair Dismissal
Civil Procedure Labour Law Condonation Late Filing Counter Claim Unfair Dismissal

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Elizabeth Dorathea Brits

Applicant

Helena Marial Bester

Applicant

Kizelle Spohr

Applicant

Miranda Strachan

Applicant

Lindi Bekker

Applicant

Mathew John Matthysen

Applicant

Combined Manufacturers National (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Condonation Application / Application for Condonation of Late Filing of Response to Counter Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have shown good cause for condonation of the late filing of their response to the respondent's counter-claim.
  2. 2 Whether the explanation for the delay is reasonable and covers the entire period of lateness.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants have reasonable prospects of success in the counter-claim.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the delay in filing the response to the counter-claim was excessive and the explanation provided by the applicants was neither plausible nor reasonable. The first applicant failed to explain the entire period of delay, and reliance on the unavailability of counsel and attorneys was insufficient. The applicants did not demonstrate reasonable prospects of success in the counter-claim, nor did they raise any valid exceptions to the counter-claim. On a conspectus of all the facts and circumstances, the applicants failed to show good cause for condonation, and it was not in the interests of justice to grant the application. Accordingly, the application for condonation was...

Court Disposition

Application for condonation of the late filing of the response to the respondent's counter-claim is dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for condonation of the late filing of the response to the respondent's counter-claim is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.