Chikane v General Public Service Sector Bargaining Council and Others (JR2753/19) [2024] ZALCJHB 189 (8 May 2024)

Chikane v General Public Service Sector Bargaining Council and Others (JR2753/19) [2024] ZALCJHB 189 (8 May 2024)

The court found that while the applicant was not in breach of the 60-day period for filing the record under clause 11.2.2, due to the Registrar's failure to advise that the record had been filed, the applicant failed to comply with clause 11.2.7 by not ensuring that all necessary papers were filed within twelve months of launching the review and not requesting the Registrar to enroll the matter for hearing. As a result, the application was archived and regarded as lapsed. In the absence of a formal application to reinstate the review, the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the matter. The application was accordingly struck from the roll.

Citation
[2024] ZALCJHB 189
Parties
Applicant: Albert Chikane; Respondent: General Public Service Sector Bargaining Council; Respondent: MEC for Roads & Transport (Gauteng); Respondent: Commissioner Maree NO
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 May 2024
Case Number
JR2753/19
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application to Review and Set Aside Arbitration Award; Matter Struck From the Roll for Non Compliance
Outcome
Application struck from the roll for lack of jurisdiction due to non-compliance with Practice Manual and absence of reinstatement application.
Judges
R Daniels
Legal Topics
Practice Manual Compliance, Review of Arbitration Award, Jurisdiction, Reinstatement Application
Labour Law Civil Procedure Practice Manual Compliance Review of Arbitration Award Jurisdiction Reinstatement Application

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Albert Chikane

Applicant

General Public Service Sector Bargaining Council

Respondent

MEC for Roads & Transport (Gauteng)

Respondent

Commissioner Maree NO

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application to Review and Set Aside Arbitration Award; Matter Struck From the Roll for Non Compliance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant complied with the Labour Court Practice Manual in prosecuting the review application.
  2. 2 Whether the court has jurisdiction to hear the review application in the absence of an application to reinstate.
  3. 3 Whether the delays in filing the arbitration record and necessary papers were justified.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that while the applicant was not in breach of the 60-day period for filing the record under clause 11.2.2, due to the Registrar's failure to advise that the record had been filed, the applicant failed to comply with clause 11.2.7 by not ensuring that all necessary papers were filed within twelve months of launching the review and not requesting the Registrar to enroll the matter for hearing. As a result, the application was archived and regarded as lapsed. In the absence of a formal application to reinstate the review, the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the matter. The application was accordingly struck from the roll.

Court Disposition

Application struck from the roll for lack of jurisdiction due to non-compliance with Practice Manual and absence of reinstatement application.

Orders

  • The application is struck from the roll.
  • There is no order as to costs.