General Workers Union of SA and Others v Remade Plastics (Pty) Ltd (JR410/05) [2010] ZALCJHB 60 (11 February 2010)

General Workers Union of SA and Others v Remade Plastics (Pty) Ltd (JR410/05) [2010] ZALCJHB 60 (11 February 2010)

The court found that the applicants' explanation for their default was unreasonable and did not constitute good cause. The attorney's failure to supervise an inexperienced secretary and to respond to repeated communications from the respondent amounted to negligence. Furthermore, the applicants failed to demonstrate any bona fide prospects of success on the merits, as there was no genuine dispute of fact regarding reinstatement or re-employment. The court held that the circumstances justified an award of costs de bonis propriis against the applicants' attorney, as his conduct was negligent and disregarded the court's rules. Accordingly, the application for rescission was dismissed.

Citation
[2010] ZALCJHB 60
Parties
Applicant: General Workers Union of SA; Applicant: N Ndlovu & 10 Others; Respondent: Remade Plastics (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 February 2010
Case Number
JR410/05
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application for Rescission of Dismissal Order
Outcome
Application for rescission dismissed; costs de bonis propriis awarded against applicants' attorney.
Judges
Molahlehi
Legal Topics
Rescission of Judgment, Unfair Dismissal, Costs De Bonis Propriis, Operational Requirements Retrenchment
Labour Law Civil Procedure Rescission of Judgment Unfair Dismissal Costs De Bonis Propriis Operational Requirements Retrenchment

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

General Workers Union of SA

Applicant

N Ndlovu & 10 Others

Applicant

Remade Plastics (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application for Rescission of Dismissal Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants provided a reasonable and acceptable explanation for their default in failing to appear at the hearing.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants demonstrated bona fide prospects of success on the merits of their unfair dismissal claim.
  3. 3 Whether costs de bonis propriis should be awarded against the applicants' attorney for negligent conduct.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants' explanation for their default was unreasonable and did not constitute good cause. The attorney's failure to supervise an inexperienced secretary and to respond to repeated communications from the respondent amounted to negligence. Furthermore, the applicants failed to demonstrate any bona fide prospects of success on the merits, as there was no genuine dispute of fact regarding reinstatement or re-employment. The court held that the circumstances justified an award of costs de bonis propriis against the applicants' attorney, as his conduct was negligent and disregarded the court's rules. Accordingly, the application for rescission was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for rescission dismissed; costs de bonis propriis awarded against applicants' attorney.

Orders

  • The application to rescind the order made by the court on 7 August 2006 is dismissed.
  • The applicants' attorney is to pay the costs of the respondent de bonis propriis.