Colours Trust v Freysen and Another (D135/98) [1999] ZALC 30 (5 March 1999)

Colours Trust v Freysen and Another (D135/98) [1999] ZALC 30 (5 March 1999)

The applicant failed to file its heads of argument within the stipulated time and did not submit a condonation application despite being given an opportunity and clear deadlines. This conduct constitutes a flagrant disregard of the court's directions and prejudices the respondent. The applicant's attorneys failed to communicate with the court or the respondent's attorneys, leaving both in uncertainty. The court finds the applicant's case on the merits to be hopeless and, in the interests of justice, dismisses the application with costs on an attorney and client scale. Furthermore, the applicant's attorneys are ordered to pay a portion of the costs personally, and the applicant and its...

Citation
[1999] ZALC 30
Parties
Applicant: Colours Trust; Respondent: Janele Freysen; Respondent: The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 March 1999
Case Number
D135/98
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment After Failure to File Condonation Application
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs on an attorney and client scale; costs partially payable by applicant's attorneys.
Judges
R. M. M. Zondo
Legal Topics
Condonation, Costs Order, Review Application, Failure to Comply With Court Directions
Civil Procedure Labour Law Condonation Costs Order Review Application Failure to Comply With Court Directions

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

Parties

Colours Trust

Applicant

Janele Freysen

Respondent

The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment After Failure to File Condonation Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's failure to file a condonation application for late heads of argument warrants dismissal of the review application.
  2. 2 Whether the conduct of the applicant and its attorneys justifies a punitive costs order.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's case on the merits has any prospect of success.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to file its heads of argument within the stipulated time and did not submit a condonation application despite being given an opportunity and clear deadlines. This conduct constitutes a flagrant disregard of the court's directions and prejudices the respondent. The applicant's attorneys failed to communicate with the court or the respondent's attorneys, leaving both in uncertainty. The court finds the applicant's case on the merits to be hopeless and, in the interests of justice, dismisses the application with costs on an attorney and client scale. Furthermore, the applicant's attorneys are ordered to pay a portion of the costs personally, and the applicant and its...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs on an attorney and client scale; costs partially payable by applicant's attorneys.

Orders

  • The applicant’s application is dismissed with costs on the scale as between attorney and client.
  • The applicant’s attorneys are ordered to pay 20% of the costs referred to above and the balance is to be paid by the applicant.