Chiloane v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR945/24) [2025] ZALCJHB 346 (6 August 2025)

Chiloane v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR945/24) [2025] ZALCJHB 346 (6 August 2025)

The applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the 16-month delay in filing the review application, relying solely on the trade union's assurances without taking reasonable steps to confirm the status of his case. The annexures showed the union had advised him early on that prospects were minimal and that no review would be pursued. The applicant did not address the court on prospects of success, nor did his legal representative advance any grounds. In the absence of a valid explanation for the delay and any submissions on prospects of success, condonation cannot be granted. The application is dismissed.

Citation
[2025] ZALCJHB 346
Parties
Applicant: Mandla Chiloane; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Elias Lekgwathi NO; Respondent: Eskom Arnot Power Station; Respondent: Mr Ntuli
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
6 August 2025
Case Number
JR945/24
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Condonation Application for Late Filing of Review
Outcome
Condonation application dismissed; no order as to costs.
Judges
N L Dandadzi
Legal Topics
Condonation, Late Filing of Review, Prospects of Success, Interests of Justice
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Late Filing of Review Prospects of Success Interests of Justice

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mandla Chiloane

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Elias Lekgwathi NO

Respondent

Eskom Arnot Power Station

Respondent

Mr Ntuli

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Condonation Application for Late Filing of Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has provided sufficient explanation for the 16-month delay in filing the review application.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has demonstrated prospects of success on the merits of the review.
  3. 3 Whether the interests of justice warrant granting condonation despite the delay.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the 16-month delay in filing the review application, relying solely on the trade union's assurances without taking reasonable steps to confirm the status of his case. The annexures showed the union had advised him early on that prospects were minimal and that no review would be pursued. The applicant did not address the court on prospects of success, nor did his legal representative advance any grounds. In the absence of a valid explanation for the delay and any submissions on prospects of success, condonation cannot be granted. The application is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Condonation application dismissed; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The condonation application is dismissed.
  • There is no order as to costs.