Els v Memmel (J3727/01) [2002] ZALC 129 (7 March 2002)
- Citation
- [2002] ZALC 129
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- Labour Court
- Panel
- E Revelas
- Case number
- J3727/01
More details
- Court
- Labour Court
- Panel
- E Revelas
- Case number
- J3727/01
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court found that although the delay in filing the answering affidavit was substantial, it was not excessive. The respondent provided a reasonable explanation for the delay, namely ill-health, and demonstrated prima facie prospects of success in the review application. In the interests of fairness, condonation for the late filing was granted. Consequently, the application to have the arbitration award made an order of court was dismissed.
Court disposition
Condonation for the late filing of the opposing papers is granted. The application to have the award made an order of court is dismissed.
Orders
- Condonation for the late filing of the opposing papers is granted.
- The application to have the award made an order of court is dismissed.
02
Material facts
Parties
H Els
ApplicantAlec R Memmel
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Condonation Application / Application for Condonation for Late Filing of Answering Affidavit
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether condonation should be granted for the late filing of the respondent's answering affidavit.
- 02
Whether the application to have the arbitration award made an order of court should be granted.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant sought to have the arbitration award made an order of court and opposed the condonation for the late filing of the respondent's answering affidavit, arguing that the delay was substantial and unjustified.
- Respondent
- The respondent applied for condonation for the late filing of his answering affidavit, explaining that the delay was partially due to ill-health and arguing that there were prima facie prospects of success in the review application.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Labour Court practice
Condonation may be granted where the delay is not excessive, a reasonable explanation is provided, and there are prospects of success.
- 02
Labour Court practice
The interests of fairness and justice may justify condonation where ill-health contributed to the delay.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court found that although the delay in filing the answering affidavit was substantial, it was not excessive. The respondent provided a reasonable explanation for the delay, namely ill-health, and demonstrated prima facie prospects of success in the review application. In the interests of fairness, condonation for the late filing was granted. Consequently, the application to have the arbitration award made an order of court was dismissed.
Obiter and limits
- The court noted that condonation applications should be approached with fairness, especially where ill-health is a contributing factor to the delay.
Court disposition
Condonation for the late filing of the opposing papers is granted. The application to have the award made an order of court is dismissed.
- Condonation for the late filing of the opposing papers is granted.
- The application to have the award made an order of court is dismissed.
Source and reliance status
Labour Court
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Labour Court
Judgment
Sneller Verbatim/ssl
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH
AFRICA
(HELD AT BRAAMFONTEIN)
BRAAMFONTEIN CASE NO: J3727/01
2002-03-07
In the matter between
H ELS Applicant
and
ALEC R MEMMEL Respondent
________________
J U D G M E N T
Delivered on 7 March 2002
REVELAS J:
1. In this matter I have considered an application for condonation for the respondentâs answering affidavit. The delay is substantial, but it is not excessive. The prospects of success in succeeding in review application has been prima facie demonstrated by the respondent, (the applicant in the condonation application), and in the circumstances I believe that it would be fair if I were to grant condonation, particularly as the explanation for the delay was caused partially by ill-health.
1.
2. The condonation for the late filing of the opposing papers is thus granted and the application to have the award made an order of court is dismissed.
______
E. Revelas
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.