Jonkers v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (C295/2019) [2021] ZALCCT 40 (10 June 2021)

Jonkers v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (C295/2019) [2021] ZALCCT 40 (10 June 2021)

The court found that the applicant had taken irregular steps by failing to serve the review application, the Rule 7A(6) notice, and the transcribed record on the third respondent, as required by the Labour Court Rules. The subsequent filing of a Rule 7A(8) notice was also irregular, as the record had not been properly served. The applicant was given an opportunity to rectify these procedural defects within 20 court days. The court held that costs for the Rule 11 application would only be awarded against the applicant if he failed to comply with the order within the stipulated time, balancing fairness and the interests of justice.

Citation
[2021] ZALCCT 40
Parties
Applicant: Shakeel Jonkers; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Anthony Verhoog; Respondent: South African Breweries Ltd
Court
Labour Court Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 June 2021
Case Number
C295/2019
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Rule 11 Application to Set Aside Irregular Steps in Review Proceedings
Outcome
Irregular steps set aside; applicant granted leave to comply within 20 court days; conditional costs order.
Judges
H Rabkin-Naicker
Legal Topics
Review Proceedings, Irregular Steps, Service of Process, Costs Order
Labour Law Civil Procedure Review Proceedings Irregular Steps Service of Process Costs Order

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

Shakeel Jonkers

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Anthony Verhoog

Respondent

South African Breweries Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Rule 11 Application to Set Aside Irregular Steps in Review Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's failure to serve the review application and related notices on the third respondent constitutes irregular steps.
  2. 2 Whether the filing of notices in terms of Rule 7A(6) and Rule 7A(8) without proper service is irregular.
  3. 3 Whether the third respondent is entitled to costs for the Rule 11 application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had taken irregular steps by failing to serve the review application, the Rule 7A(6) notice, and the transcribed record on the third respondent, as required by the Labour Court Rules. The subsequent filing of a Rule 7A(8) notice was also irregular, as the record had not been properly served. The applicant was given an opportunity to rectify these procedural defects within 20 court days. The court held that costs for the Rule 11 application would only be awarded against the applicant if he failed to comply with the order within the stipulated time, balancing fairness and the interests of justice.

Court Disposition

Irregular steps set aside; applicant granted leave to comply within 20 court days; conditional costs order.

Orders

  • The filing of the record of the review and the filing of a Notice in terms of Rule 7A(6) are set aside as irregular steps.
  • The filing of the Rule 7A(8) Notice is set aside as an irregular step.