Green v CCMA-Pietersburg and Others (J2927/2000) [2002] ZALC 155 (31 July 2002)

Green v CCMA-Pietersburg and Others (J2927/2000) [2002] ZALC 155 (31 July 2002)

The court found that the applicant's explanation for the 64-day delay in filing the review application was inadequate and lacked detail for significant periods. The applicant failed to provide any acceptable reason for the delay, either personally or through her attorney, and the supplementary affidavit did not...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2002] ZALC 155
Parties
Applicant: Merlea Greens; Respondent: CCMA - Pietersburg; Respondent: Gerhard Lombaard; Respondent: Willem Fouché
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
31 July 2002
Case Number
J2927/2000
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Condonation and Review of Arbitration Award; Application to Make Award Order of Court
Outcome
Condonation for late filing of the review application is refused. The arbitration award is made an order of court.
Judges
Gering
Legal Topics
Condonation for Late Filing, Arbitration Award Enforcement, Unfair Dismissal, Review of Ccma Award
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation for Late Filing Arbitration Award Enforcement Unfair Dismissal Review of Ccma Award

Source-derived case record

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Merlea Greens

Applicant

CCMA - Pietersburg

Respondent

Gerhard Lombaard

Respondent

Willem Fouché

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Condonation and Review of Arbitration Award; Application to Make Award Order of Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether condonation should be granted for the late filing of the review application.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitration award should be made an order of court under section 158(1)(c) of the Labour Relations Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's explanation for the 64-day delay in filing the review application was inadequate and lacked detail for significant periods. The applicant failed to provide any acceptable reason for the delay, either personally or through her attorney, and the supplementary affidavit did not remedy these deficiencies. The principles governing condonation require a full and proper explanation, which was not provided. Consequently, condonation was refused. The court further held that the employee was entitled to have the arbitration award made an order of court under section 158(1)(c) of the Labour Relations Act, as the review application was not properly before the court.

Court Disposition

Condonation for late filing of the review application is refused. The arbitration award is made an order of court.

Orders

  • Condonation for the late filing of the review application is refused.
  • The arbitration award dated 3 April 2000 is made an order of court pursuant to section 158(1)(c) of the Labour Relations Act.