Mabudusha v Commission For Conciliation, Mediation And Arbitration and Others (JR3347/2010) [2014] ZALCJHB 207 (11 June 2014)

Mabudusha v Commission For Conciliation, Mediation And Arbitration and Others (JR3347/2010) [2014] ZALCJHB 207 (11 June 2014)

The court held that the applicant failed to provide a satisfactory and reasonable explanation for the late filing of the review application. The admitted gross negligence and incompetence of the applicant's attorneys did not justify condonation, and the distinction between dies and dies non was irrelevant as the attorneys should have been familiar with the Labour Court rules. The court considered the applicant's prospects of success and found them lacking. No grounds were established to show that the court exercised its discretion improperly or unreasonably. Accordingly, there was no reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion, and leave to appeal was refused.

Citation
[2014] ZALCJHB 207
Parties
Applicant: Wilson Mabudusha; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: L Nowosenetz NO; Respondent: Land Bank
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 June 2014
Case Number
JR3347/2010
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Refusal of Condonation for Late Filing of Review Application
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal refused.
Judges
Seedat
Legal Topics
Condonation, Late Filing of Review, Judicial Discretion, Prospects of Success
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Late Filing of Review Judicial Discretion Prospects of Success

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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wilson Mabudusha

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

L Nowosenetz NO

Respondent

Land Bank

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Refusal of Condonation for Late Filing of Review Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has established grounds for condonation for the late filing of the review application.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's attorneys' misunderstanding of the applicable time periods constitutes sufficient cause for condonation.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant has reasonable prospects of success in the review application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the applicant failed to provide a satisfactory and reasonable explanation for the late filing of the review application. The admitted gross negligence and incompetence of the applicant's attorneys did not justify condonation, and the distinction between dies and dies non was irrelevant as the attorneys should have been familiar with the Labour Court rules. The court considered the applicant's prospects of success and found them lacking. No grounds were established to show that the court exercised its discretion improperly or unreasonably. Accordingly, there was no reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion, and leave to appeal was refused.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal refused.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal the judgment of 6 January 2014 is refused.
  • There is no order as to costs.