Emmenes and Others v Cairnhall Hospital Investment Holding (JS1004/20) [2021] ZALCJHB 384 (20 October 2021)

Emmenes and Others v Cairnhall Hospital Investment Holding (JS1004/20) [2021] ZALCJHB 384 (20 October 2021)

The court found that the applicants provided a detailed and acceptable explanation for the delay, including procedural steps, attempts to consolidate disputes, and delays caused by external factors such as lockdown. The clause relied upon by the respondent did not constitute an agreed retirement age but rather entitled the employer to assess performance at age 65, which was not done. The applicants demonstrated excellent prospects of success, and the interests of justice required that condonation be granted. Prejudice to the parties was not a decisive factor, and the respondent's opposition lacked merit.

Citation
[2021] ZALCJHB 384
Parties
Applicant: Karen van Emmenes; Applicant: Susanna Myrilas; Applicant: Sylvia Else; Applicant: Rhoda Venter; Respondent: Cairnhall Hospital Investment Holding
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 October 2021
Case Number
JS1004/20
Procedural Posture
Condonation Application / Application for Condonation of Late Referral to Labour Court
Outcome
Condonation granted for the late referral of the statement of case.
Judges
F. Coetzee
Legal Topics
Condonation, Unfair Dismissal, Unfair Discrimination, Retirement Age, Prospects of Success
Labour Law Condonation Unfair Dismissal Unfair Discrimination Retirement Age 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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Karen van Emmenes

Applicant

Susanna Myrilas

Applicant

Sylvia Else

Applicant

Rhoda Venter

Applicant

Cairnhall Hospital Investment Holding

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Condonation Application / Application for Condonation of Late Referral to Labour Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants' late referral of their statement of case to the Labour Court should be condoned.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants have provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants have prospects of success in their claim of unfair dismissal based on age.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants provided a detailed and acceptable explanation for the delay, including procedural steps, attempts to consolidate disputes, and delays caused by external factors such as lockdown. The clause relied upon by the respondent did not constitute an agreed retirement age but rather entitled the employer to assess performance at age 65, which was not done. The applicants demonstrated excellent prospects of success, and the interests of justice required that condonation be granted. Prejudice to the parties was not a decisive factor, and the respondent's opposition lacked merit.

Court Disposition

Condonation granted for the late referral of the statement of case.

Orders

  • The applicants' late referral of their statement of case is condoned.
  • There is no order as to costs.