Commission for Conciliation Mediation And Arbitration v Pelele and Another (J2416/08) [2010] ZALCJHB 366 (22 January 2010)

Commission for Conciliation Mediation And Arbitration v Pelele and Another (J2416/08) [2010] ZALCJHB 366 (22 January 2010)

The court found that the first respondent failed to comply with the directives set by Molahlehi J regarding the filing of affidavits and heads of argument. The respondent was not diligent in prosecuting or opposing the matter and did not file his papers on time. The court rejected the argument that the application was premature due to the absence of a condonation application, finding that the respondent's conduct warranted a costs order. Accordingly, the matter was postponed sine die and costs were awarded against the first respondent on an attorney and own client basis.

Citation
[2010] ZALCJHB 366
Parties
Applicant: Commission for Conciliation Mediation And Arbitration; Respondent: Lentekile Patric Pelele; Respondent: Tswaing Local Municipality
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 January 2010
Case Number
J2416/08
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Postponement and Costs Order
Outcome
Matter postponed sine die; costs awarded against the first respondent on an attorney and own client basis.
Judges
Moroka
Legal Topics
Postponement, Costs Order, Condonation, Compliance With Court Directives
Labour Law Civil Procedure Postponement Costs Order Condonation Compliance With Court Directives

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Commission for Conciliation Mediation And Arbitration

Applicant

Lentekile Patric Pelele

Respondent

Tswaing Local Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Postponement and Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the matter should be postponed sine die.
  2. 2 Whether a costs order should be made against the first respondent.
  3. 3 Whether the first respondent complied with the court's directives regarding filing of papers.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the first respondent failed to comply with the directives set by Molahlehi J regarding the filing of affidavits and heads of argument. The respondent was not diligent in prosecuting or opposing the matter and did not file his papers on time. The court rejected the argument that the application was premature due to the absence of a condonation application, finding that the respondent's conduct warranted a costs order. Accordingly, the matter was postponed sine die and costs were awarded against the first respondent on an attorney and own client basis.

Court Disposition

Matter postponed sine die; costs awarded against the first respondent on an attorney and own client basis.

Orders

  • The matter is postponed sine die.
  • Costs are granted against the first respondent on an attorney and own client basis.