Julies v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (C578/2016) [2018] ZALCCT 39 (12 December 2018)

Julies v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (C578/2016) [2018] ZALCCT 39 (12 December 2018)

The court found that the grounds for appeal were a repetition of those raised in the review application and lacked merit. The applicant failed to demonstrate any reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion. The alleged irregularity regarding remote testimony did not prejudice the applicant, as his legal representative conducted extensive cross-examination. There was no evidence of bias by the arbitrator. The interests of justice and the need for finality in labour disputes weighed against granting leave to appeal. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs.

Citation
[2018] ZALCCT 39
Parties
Applicant: Basil Allen Julies; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Madeleine Loyson N.O; Respondent: University of the Western Cape
Court
Labour Court Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 December 2018
Case Number
C578/2016
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal After Dismissal of Review Application
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Prinsloo
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Review of Arbitration Award, Reasonable Prospect of Success, Gross Irregularity, Bias, Costs Order
Labour Law Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Review of Arbitration Award Reasonable Prospect of Success Gross Irregularity Bias 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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Basil Allen Julies

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Madeleine Loyson N.O

Respondent

University of the Western Cape

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal After Dismissal of Review Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has demonstrated reasonable prospects that another court could reach a different conclusion on appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitrator committed a gross irregularity by allowing remote testimony and thereby denied the applicant a fair hearing.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator was biased against the applicant during the arbitration proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the grounds for appeal were a repetition of those raised in the review application and lacked merit. The applicant failed to demonstrate any reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion. The alleged irregularity regarding remote testimony did not prejudice the applicant, as his legal representative conducted extensive cross-examination. There was no evidence of bias by the arbitrator. The interests of justice and the need for finality in labour disputes weighed against granting leave to appeal. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.