Delta v De Bruin (J727/98) [1998] ZALC 105 (9 November 1998)

Delta v De Bruin (J727/98) [1998] ZALC 105 (9 November 1998)

The court found that the applicant had instituted rescission proceedings in the CCMA prior to the granting of the section 158(1)(c) order, and this fact was not known to Landman J at the time. Applying the principle that a judgment is erroneously granted if a material fact is unknown to the judge, the court held that the order making the arbitration award an order of court was erroneously granted. The application for rescission in terms of section 165(a) of the Labour Relations Act therefore succeeded. The court further exercised its discretion to award costs against the applicant, considering its repeated failure to appear at various proceedings and the manner in which it conducted the...

Citation
[1998] ZALC 105
Parties
Applicant: Data Delta; Respondent: De Bruin, M M
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
9 November 1998
Case Number
J727/98
Procedural Posture
Rescission Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application for rescission granted; the order of Landman J dated 12 June 1998 is rescinded and set aside. Costs awarded against the applicant.
Judges
Basson
Legal Topics
Rescission of Judgment, Arbitration Award Enforcement, Costs Award, Service of Process
Labour Law Civil Procedure Rescission of Judgment Arbitration Award Enforcement Costs Award Service of Process

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 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Data Delta

Applicant

De Bruin, M M

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Rescission Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the order granted by Landman J on 12 June 1998 was erroneously made in terms of section 165(a) of the Labour Relations Act.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's rescission proceedings in the CCMA precluded the making of the arbitration award an order of court.
  3. 3 Whether costs should be awarded against the applicant given its conduct.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had instituted rescission proceedings in the CCMA prior to the granting of the section 158(1)(c) order, and this fact was not known to Landman J at the time. Applying the principle that a judgment is erroneously granted if a material fact is unknown to the judge, the court held that the order making the arbitration award an order of court was erroneously granted. The application for rescission in terms of section 165(a) of the Labour Relations Act therefore succeeded. The court further exercised its discretion to award costs against the applicant, considering its repeated failure to appear at various proceedings and the manner in which it conducted the...

Court Disposition

Application for rescission granted; the order of Landman J dated 12 June 1998 is rescinded and set aside. Costs awarded against the applicant.

Orders

  • The order granted by Landman J on 12 June 1998 is rescinded and set aside.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the respondent's costs.