Groenewald and Another v National Transport Movement (JS805/20) [2024] ZALCJHB 35 (5 February 2024)

Groenewald and Another v National Transport Movement (JS805/20) [2024] ZALCJHB 35 (5 February 2024)

The respondent's statement of defence was filed one year and eleven months late, amounting to 689 calendar days and 490 court days. The respondent failed to provide any reasonable or acceptable explanation for this excessive delay, both in its founding affidavit and during oral argument. The respondent did not comply with a prior court order requiring it to file its statement of defence and an explanation for the delay within ten days. The explanation tendered was wholly inadequate, lacking detail and failing to account for material periods of the delay. In accordance with established legal principles, where there is no reasonable explanation for the delay, the prospects of success are...

Citation
[2024] ZALCJHB 35
Parties
Applicant: Herman Groenewald; Applicant: Zelda Groenewald; Respondent: National Transport Movement
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 February 2024
Case Number
JS805/20
Procedural Posture
Condonation Application / Application for Condonation for Late Filing of Statement of Defence
Outcome
Condonation for the late filing of the respondent's statement of defence is refused and the respondent's application for condonation is dismissed.
Judges
R Adams
Legal Topics
Condonation, Late Filing, Statement of Defence, Interests of Justice, Expeditious Dispute Resolution
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Late Filing Statement of Defence Interests of Justice Expeditious Dispute Resolution

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 6 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Herman Groenewald

Applicant

Zelda Groenewald

Applicant

National Transport Movement

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Condonation Application / Application for Condonation for Late Filing of Statement of Defence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent has provided a reasonable and acceptable explanation for the excessive delay in filing its statement of defence.
  2. 2 Whether condonation should be granted for the late filing of the respondent's statement of defence.
  3. 3 Whether the interests of justice require condonation to be granted in light of the respondent's conduct.

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent's statement of defence was filed one year and eleven months late, amounting to 689 calendar days and 490 court days. The respondent failed to provide any reasonable or acceptable explanation for this excessive delay, both in its founding affidavit and during oral argument. The respondent did not comply with a prior court order requiring it to file its statement of defence and an explanation for the delay within ten days. The explanation tendered was wholly inadequate, lacking detail and failing to account for material periods of the delay. In accordance with established legal principles, where there is no reasonable explanation for the delay, the prospects of success are...

Court Disposition

Condonation for the late filing of the respondent's statement of defence is refused and the respondent's application for condonation is dismissed.

Orders

  • Condonation for the late filing of the respondent's statement of defence is refused and the respondent's application for condonation is dismissed.
  • There is no order as to costs.