FEDCRAW obo Msiza v Chokwe NO and Others (JR 1869/2018) [2020] ZALCJHB 158 (25 August 2020)

FEDCRAW obo Msiza v Chokwe NO and Others (JR 1869/2018) [2020] ZALCJHB 158 (25 August 2020)

The court found that the arbitrator correctly applied the test for condonation, noting that the delay was not excessive but the explanation for the delay was inadequate and unsupported by evidence from the applicant's attorney. The applicant's prospects of success were limited, as she had pleaded guilty to serious misconduct. The arbitrator's conclusion that the applicant's explanation was unsatisfactory and that the respondent's interest in finality outweighed any prejudice to the applicant was reasonable. The applicant's attempt to introduce a new version of events in the review proceedings was impermissible. The arbitrator did not commit any reviewable irregularity, and the ruling was...

Citation
[2020] ZALCJHB 158
Parties
Applicant: FEDCRAW obo Esther Mmatsatsi Msiza; Respondent: Abner Chokwe N.O.; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Naartjie Truworths
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 August 2020
Case Number
JR 1869/2018
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application to Review and Set Aside Condonation Ruling
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Judges
Van Niekerk
Legal Topics
Condonation, Unfair Dismissal, Review of Arbitration Award, Lateness of Referral
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Unfair Dismissal Review of Arbitration Award Lateness of Referral

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

FEDCRAW obo Esther Mmatsatsi Msiza

Applicant

Abner Chokwe N.O.

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Naartjie Truworths

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application to Review and Set Aside Condonation Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrator's refusal to grant condonation for the late referral of the unfair dismissal dispute was reviewable.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay in referral.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant had prospects of success in the unfair dismissal dispute.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the arbitrator correctly applied the test for condonation, noting that the delay was not excessive but the explanation for the delay was inadequate and unsupported by evidence from the applicant's attorney. The applicant's prospects of success were limited, as she had pleaded guilty to serious misconduct. The arbitrator's conclusion that the applicant's explanation was unsatisfactory and that the respondent's interest in finality outweighed any prejudice to the applicant was reasonable. The applicant's attempt to introduce a new version of events in the review proceedings was impermissible. The arbitrator did not commit any reviewable irregularity, and the ruling was...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • Each party is to bear its own costs.