Luvuyo v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR732/13) [2017] ZALCJHB 86 (28 February 2017)

Luvuyo v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR732/13) [2017] ZALCJHB 86 (28 February 2017)

The court accepted the applicant's explanation for the late filing of the leave to appeal, given his lay status and reliance on the Legal Aid Board, and condoned the delay. However, upon considering the merits, the court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different conclusion regarding the dismissal of his review application. The Commissioner’s refusal to condone the late referral of the unfair dismissal dispute was upheld, and the application for leave to appeal was dismissed.

Citation
[2017] ZALCJHB 86
Parties
Applicant: Mangocobonga Luvuyo; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Commissioner Elizabeth Lerumo; Respondent: Kloof Gold Field
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 February 2017
Case Number
JR732/13
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Review Application
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed; no order as to costs.
Judges
E.M Molahlehi
Legal Topics
Condonation of Late Referral, Unfair Dismissal, Leave to Appeal, Review of Ccma Award
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation of Late Referral Unfair Dismissal Leave to Appeal Review of Ccma Award

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mangocobonga Luvuyo

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Commissioner Elizabeth Lerumo

Respondent

Kloof Gold Field

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's late filing of the application for leave to appeal should be condoned.
  2. 2 Whether there are reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different conclusion regarding the dismissal of the review application.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant made out a case for leave to appeal against the judgment dismissing his review application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court accepted the applicant's explanation for the late filing of the leave to appeal, given his lay status and reliance on the Legal Aid Board, and condoned the delay. However, upon considering the merits, the court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different conclusion regarding the dismissal of his review application. The Commissioner’s refusal to condone the late referral of the unfair dismissal dispute was upheld, and the application for leave to appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.