Drift Reactions CC v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR2726/16) [2019] ZALCJHB 174 (19 July 2019)

Drift Reactions CC v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR2726/16) [2019] ZALCJHB 174 (19 July 2019)

The applicant failed to provide any reasonable or acceptable explanation for the substantial delay in filing the review application. The court found that the applicant was at all times represented by SAUEO, which provided the fax number for notifications, and that the applicant did not take reasonable steps to expedite the review after resigning from SAUEO. The applicant's conduct demonstrated a lack of diligence and interest in the matter. The prejudice to the fourth respondent was significant, given the repeated rescission applications and delays. Applying established principles, the court held that condonation should be refused where no adequate explanation for delay is provided,...

Citation
[2019] ZALCJHB 174
Parties
Applicant: Drift Reactions CC; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Commissioner Mamisile Ekweswa N.O; Respondent: Commissioner Lanthis Taylor N.O; Respondent: Lufuno Norman Mulaudzi
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 July 2019
Case Number
JR2726/16
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review and Condonation
Outcome
Application for review dismissed with costs; applicant ordered to comply with arbitration award.
Judges
G. J. P. Olivier
Legal Topics
Condonation, Review of Arbitration Award, Rescission of Award, Individual Dismissal, Late Filing, Representation by Union
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Review of Arbitration Award Rescission of Award Individual Dismissal Late Filing Representation by Union

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Drift Reactions CC

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Commissioner Mamisile Ekweswa N.O

Respondent

Commissioner Lanthis Taylor N.O

Respondent

Lufuno Norman Mulaudzi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review and Condonation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant provided a reasonable and acceptable explanation for the late filing of the review application.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's conduct and reliance on its representative justified condonation for the delay.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitration award and rescission ruling should be set aside on review.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to provide any reasonable or acceptable explanation for the substantial delay in filing the review application. The court found that the applicant was at all times represented by SAUEO, which provided the fax number for notifications, and that the applicant did not take reasonable steps to expedite the review after resigning from SAUEO. The applicant's conduct demonstrated a lack of diligence and interest in the matter. The prejudice to the fourth respondent was significant, given the repeated rescission applications and delays. Applying established principles, the court held that condonation should be refused where no adequate explanation for delay is provided,...

Court Disposition

Application for review dismissed with costs; applicant ordered to comply with arbitration award.

Orders

  • The application for review is dismissed with costs.
  • The applicant is ordered to comply with the arbitration award dated 6 July 2016.