BTI World Travel v Alexandrakis (JR543/06) [2009] ZALCJHB 46 (22 July 2009)

BTI World Travel v Alexandrakis (JR543/06) [2009] ZALCJHB 46 (22 July 2009)

The applicant was not entitled to be notified of the set down date for the review application after failing to file an answering affidavit or object to the incomplete record. Filing only a notice to oppose does not constitute a response under Rule 7A(9), and the registrar was not obliged to notify the applicant of the hearing. The applicant's failure to act amounted to a waiver of its right to notice. The default judgment was not granted in error, and the application for rescission must be dismissed. Consideration of good cause for rescission is rendered academic by this finding.

Citation
[2009] ZALCJHB 46
Parties
Applicant: BTI World Travel; Respondent: Athina Alexandrakis
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 July 2009
Case Number
JR543/06
Procedural Posture
Rescission Application / Judgment on Application for Rescission of Labour Court Judgment
Outcome
Application for rescission dismissed; original judgment stands.
Judges
Nyathela AJ
Legal Topics
Rescission of Judgment, Default Judgment, Notice of Set Down, Review Proceedings, Rule 7a, Rule 16a
Labour Law Civil Procedure Rescission of Judgment Default Judgment Notice of Set Down Review Proceedings Rule 7a Rule 16a

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BTI World Travel

Applicant

Athina Alexandrakis

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Rescission Application / Judgment on Application for Rescission of Labour Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was entitled to be notified of the set down date for the review application after filing only a notice to oppose but no answering affidavit.
  2. 2 Whether the default judgment was granted in error due to lack of notice to the applicant.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant has shown good cause for rescission of the default judgment.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant was not entitled to be notified of the set down date for the review application after failing to file an answering affidavit or object to the incomplete record. Filing only a notice to oppose does not constitute a response under Rule 7A(9), and the registrar was not obliged to notify the applicant of the hearing. The applicant's failure to act amounted to a waiver of its right to notice. The default judgment was not granted in error, and the application for rescission must be dismissed. Consideration of good cause for rescission is rendered academic by this finding.

Court Disposition

Application for rescission dismissed; original judgment stands.

Orders

  • The application for rescission is dismissed.
  • The judgment by Ngcamu AJ stands.