Fisher v Marcus NO and Others (JR1906/10) [2014] ZALCJHB 2 (17 January 2014)

Fisher v Marcus NO and Others (JR1906/10) [2014] ZALCJHB 2 (17 January 2014)

The court found that the applicant's sole reliance on lack of funds for the delay in filing the review application and providing the record was insufficient and not supported by special circumstances. The applicant's membership in Legal Wise further weakened his claim. The missing portions of the arbitration record were critical to the dispute, and without a complete record, the court could not resolve the matter. The applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success, and the delay was inordinate. The court declined to remit the matter for fresh adjudication due to the applicant's responsibility for the delay and the need for finality. Consequently, condonation was refused...

Citation
[2014] ZALCJHB 2
Parties
Applicant: Fisher Sidney; Respondent: Marcus Michael N.O.; Respondent: The Metal and Engineering Industries Bargaining Council; Respondent: West Rand Engineering (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 January 2014
Case Number
JR1906/10
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application for Condonation and Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
Application for condonation dismissed; review application not entertained.
Judges
Malindi
Legal Topics
Condonation for Late Filing, Review of Arbitration Award, Incomplete Record, Prospects of Success
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation for Late Filing Review of Arbitration Award Incomplete Record 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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fisher Sidney

Applicant

Marcus Michael N.O.

Respondent

The Metal and Engineering Industries Bargaining Council

Respondent

West Rand Engineering (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application for Condonation and Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has provided sufficient grounds for condonation of the late filing of the review application.
  2. 2 Whether lack of funds constitutes a valid reason for condonation of delay in prosecuting the review application.
  3. 3 Whether the incomplete record of arbitration proceedings precludes a finding of reasonable prospects of success.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's sole reliance on lack of funds for the delay in filing the review application and providing the record was insufficient and not supported by special circumstances. The applicant's membership in Legal Wise further weakened his claim. The missing portions of the arbitration record were critical to the dispute, and without a complete record, the court could not resolve the matter. The applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success, and the delay was inordinate. The court declined to remit the matter for fresh adjudication due to the applicant's responsibility for the delay and the need for finality. Consequently, condonation was refused...

Court Disposition

Application for condonation dismissed; review application not entertained.

Orders

  • The application for condonation is dismissed.
  • There is no order as to costs.