Fidelity Springbok Security Services (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1853/08) [2016] ZALCJHB 65 (24 February 2016)

Fidelity Springbok Security Services (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1853/08) [2016] ZALCJHB 65 (24 February 2016)

The court found that the applicant did not prosecute the application for leave to appeal with due diligence, as the matter reached the court more than three years after the application was filed. Although the delay in filing was only nine days and condonation could be granted, the overall lack of diligence in prosecuting the application was decisive. Furthermore, the court was not satisfied that another court would reach a different conclusion on the merits, as the refusal of postponement was consistent with CCMA Rules and the applicant had ample opportunity to secure its witnesses. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed.

Citation
[2016] ZALCJHB 65
Parties
Applicant: Fidelity Springbok Security Services (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Commissioner Mapalo Tsatsimpe; Respondent: L Greyling
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 February 2016
Case Number
JR1853/08
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Review Application.
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Judges
Van Niekerk
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Condonation for Late Filing, Review Threshold, Postponement Rules
Labour Law Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Condonation for Late Filing Review Threshold Postponement Rules

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fidelity Springbok Security Services (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Commissioner Mapalo Tsatsimpe

Respondent

L Greyling

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Review Application.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether condonation for the late filing of the application for leave to appeal should be granted.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant prosecuted the application for leave to appeal with due diligence.
  3. 3 Whether another court would reach a different conclusion on the merits of the review.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant did not prosecute the application for leave to appeal with due diligence, as the matter reached the court more than three years after the application was filed. Although the delay in filing was only nine days and condonation could be granted, the overall lack of diligence in prosecuting the application was decisive. Furthermore, the court was not satisfied that another court would reach a different conclusion on the merits, as the refusal of postponement was consistent with CCMA Rules and the applicant had ample opportunity to secure its witnesses. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.