Fischat v Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality (300/13) [2013] ZAECPEHC 12 (28 February 2013)

Fischat v Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality (300/13) [2013] ZAECPEHC 12 (28 February 2013)

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate good cause for his delay in giving notice under section 3 of the Institution of Legal Proceedings Against Certain Organs of State Act. The applicant's explanation, that he sought to avoid litigation and was ignorant of the statutory notice requirement, was not sufficient, especially given his legal background. The court held that the applicant ought to have known of the statutory requirements and that his delay, spread over two and a half years, was excessive. Furthermore, the applicant did not provide a clear basis for his entitlement to further remuneration, nor did he submit detailed statements of account linking the nature of...

Citation
[2013] ZAECPEHC 12
Parties
Applicant: Herbert Robert James Falconer Fischat; Respondent: Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 February 2013
Case Number
300/13
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Condonation and Leave to Institute Proceedings
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
Revelas
Legal Topics
Condonation, Institution of Legal Proceedings Against Organs of State Act, Remuneration Claim, Prescription, Good Cause, Urgent Application
Civil Procedure Administrative Law Condonation Institution of Legal Proceedings Against Organs of State Act Remuneration Claim Prescription Good Cause Urgent Application

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 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Herbert Robert James Falconer Fischat

Applicant

Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Condonation and Leave to Institute Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted condonation for non-compliance with the Uniform Rules of Court and section 3 of the Institution of Legal Proceedings Against Certain Organs of State Act.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has shown good cause for the delay in giving notice to the respondent municipality.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is entitled to claim remuneration for preparatory and administrative work as chairperson of the Valuation Appeal Board.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate good cause for his delay in giving notice under section 3 of the Institution of Legal Proceedings Against Certain Organs of State Act. The applicant's explanation, that he sought to avoid litigation and was ignorant of the statutory notice requirement, was not sufficient, especially given his legal background. The court held that the applicant ought to have known of the statutory requirements and that his delay, spread over two and a half years, was excessive. Furthermore, the applicant did not provide a clear basis for his entitlement to further remuneration, nor did he submit detailed statements of account linking the nature of...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.