Lubbe Construction (Pty) Ltd v Mahon NO and Another (0044751/17) [2020] ZAGPJHC 102 (23 April 2020)

Lubbe Construction (Pty) Ltd v Mahon NO and Another (0044751/17) [2020] ZAGPJHC 102 (23 April 2020)

The court found that the arbitrator was legally empowered under section 15(2) of the Arbitration Act to proceed with the arbitration hearing despite the applicant's withdrawal and absence, as the applicant had received reasonable notice and failed to show good cause for non-attendance. The applicant's decision not to seek urgent interdict relief and its subsequent non-participation were matters of its own choice and did not amount to misconduct or gross irregularity on the part of the arbitrator. The arbitrator conducted the proceedings fairly, allowing evidence and submissions from the attending party, and did not prevent the applicant from participating. The applicant's contentions were...

Citation
[2020] ZAGPJHC 102
Parties
Applicant: Lubbe Construction (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Terry Mahon NO; Respondent: Matatiele Local Municipality
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 April 2020
Case Number
0044751/17
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application to review and set aside the arbitration award is dismissed with costs.
Judges
Vally
Legal Topics
Arbitration Act Review, Arbitrator Misconduct, Gross Irregularity, Finality of Litigation
Civil Procedure Alternative Dispute Resolution Arbitration Act Review Arbitrator Misconduct Gross Irregularity Finality of Litigation

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lubbe Construction (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Terry Mahon NO

Respondent

Matatiele Local Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrator's decision to proceed with the arbitration hearing despite the applicant's withdrawal and pending court application constituted misconduct or gross irregularity under section 33 of the Arbitration Act.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitration award should be set aside on the basis that the applicant was not afforded a hearing.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the arbitrator was legally empowered under section 15(2) of the Arbitration Act to proceed with the arbitration hearing despite the applicant's withdrawal and absence, as the applicant had received reasonable notice and failed to show good cause for non-attendance. The applicant's decision not to seek urgent interdict relief and its subsequent non-participation were matters of its own choice and did not amount to misconduct or gross irregularity on the part of the arbitrator. The arbitrator conducted the proceedings fairly, allowing evidence and submissions from the attending party, and did not prevent the applicant from participating. The applicant's contentions were...

Court Disposition

Application to review and set aside the arbitration award is dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application to review the award of the first respondent is dismissed.
  • The applicant is to pay the costs of the application.