Dos Santos and Other v Khuene Nagel SA (Pty) Ltd and Others (JR1549/02) [2003] ZALC 124 (3 March 2003)

Dos Santos and Other v Khuene Nagel SA (Pty) Ltd and Others (JR1549/02) [2003] ZALC 124 (3 March 2003)

The court held that the commissioner was entitled to refuse condonation for the late referral to the CCMA, as the applicant failed to provide sufficient details or a convincing explanation for the delay. The applicant did not make out a full case in his founding affidavit and failed to reference relevant correspondence or respond to the first respondent's denial of employment. The commissioner was not obliged to consider the late reply affidavit, nor was there any irregularity in making the ruling on the day the reply was due. The applicant had the opportunity to seek legal advice and present his case fully but failed to do so. Accordingly, the review application was dismissed with costs.

Citation
[2003] ZALC 124
Parties
Applicant: Dos Santos Gil, Alfredo Julio Matos; Respondent: Khuene Nagel SA (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Sicelo Mthethwa N.O.
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
3 March 2003
Case Number
JR1549/02
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application to Review and Set Aside CCMA Condonation Ruling
Outcome
Application for review dismissed with costs.
Judges
D Pillay
Legal Topics
Condonation, Late Referral, Dismissal, Prospects of Success
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Late Referral Dismissal Prospects of Success

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dos Santos Gil, Alfredo Julio Matos

Applicant

Khuene Nagel SA (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Sicelo Mthethwa N.O.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application to Review and Set Aside CCMA Condonation Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the commissioner erred in refusing condonation for the late referral to the CCMA.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant provided a sufficient explanation for the delay in referral.
  3. 3 Whether the commissioner was obliged to consider the applicant's late reply affidavit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the commissioner was entitled to refuse condonation for the late referral to the CCMA, as the applicant failed to provide sufficient details or a convincing explanation for the delay. The applicant did not make out a full case in his founding affidavit and failed to reference relevant correspondence or respond to the first respondent's denial of employment. The commissioner was not obliged to consider the late reply affidavit, nor was there any irregularity in making the ruling on the day the reply was due. The applicant had the opportunity to seek legal advice and present his case fully but failed to do so. Accordingly, the review application was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application for review dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for review is dismissed with costs.