Hannival v Yes Clothing CC t/a Ruby Yes (C74/2022) [2023] ZALCCT 69 (13 April 2023)

Hannival v Yes Clothing CC t/a Ruby Yes (C74/2022) [2023] ZALCCT 69 (13 April 2023)

The court found that although the delay in filing the statement of claim was significant, it was primarily caused by the CCMA's failure to provide the certificate of outcome timeously, despite repeated and increasingly urgent requests from the applicant's attorneys. The applicant had referred her dispute to the CCMA within the prescribed time and attended the proceedings through her attorneys. The respondent withdrew its opposition and consented to the late filing, eliminating any prejudice. The court was satisfied that the applicant and her attorneys acted with reasonable diligence and that the delay after receiving the certificate was not excessive. Accordingly, condonation for the late...

Citation
[2023] ZALCCT 69
Parties
Applicant: Utah Hannival; Respondent: Yes Clothing CC t/a Ruby Yes
Court
Labour Court Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 April 2023
Case Number
C74/2022
Procedural Posture
Condonation Application / Ruling on Condonation for Late Referral
Outcome
Condonation for the late filing of the applicant's statement of claim is granted.
Judges
Lagrange
Legal Topics
Automatically Unfair Dismissal, Pregnancy Discrimination, Condonation, Late Referral, Section 191 Lra
Labour Law Automatically Unfair Dismissal Pregnancy Discrimination Condonation Late Referral Section 191 Lra

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Utah Hannival

Applicant

Yes Clothing CC t/a Ruby Yes

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Condonation Application / Ruling on Condonation for Late Referral

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's late referral of her claim for automatically unfair dismissal should be condoned.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in filing was reasonable and attributable to the applicant or her attorneys.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent would suffer prejudice as a result of the condonation.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although the delay in filing the statement of claim was significant, it was primarily caused by the CCMA's failure to provide the certificate of outcome timeously, despite repeated and increasingly urgent requests from the applicant's attorneys. The applicant had referred her dispute to the CCMA within the prescribed time and attended the proceedings through her attorneys. The respondent withdrew its opposition and consented to the late filing, eliminating any prejudice. The court was satisfied that the applicant and her attorneys acted with reasonable diligence and that the delay after receiving the certificate was not excessive. Accordingly, condonation for the late...

Court Disposition

Condonation for the late filing of the applicant's statement of claim is granted.

Orders

  • The late filing of the Applicant’s statement of claim is condoned.
  • No order is made as to costs.