Maditse v CCMA and Others (JR 2725/2019) [2021] ZALCJHB 69 (28 May 2021)

Maditse v CCMA and Others (JR 2725/2019) [2021] ZALCJHB 69 (28 May 2021)

The court held that the applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the significant delay in filing the review application. Even if the explanation were accepted, the applicant's prospects of success were minimal, as he did not establish that the arbitrator's decision was unreasonable or that a reviewable irregularity occurred. The employment contract's indemnity clause did not preclude disciplinary action for unauthorised use of the company vehicle or speeding. The arbitrator's findings were reasonable and supported by the evidence. Accordingly, condonation for the late filing was refused, and the review application was dismissed.

Citation
[2021] ZALCJHB 69
Parties
Applicant: Serogole Donald Maditse; Respondent: CCMA; Respondent: Seele Mokoena N.O; Respondent: Esmoene Ceiling CC
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 May 2021
Case Number
JR 2725/2019
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application for Condonation and Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
Condonation for the late filing of the review application is refused. The review application is dismissed.
Judges
Van Niekerk
Legal Topics
Condonation for Late Filing, Review of Arbitration Award, Disciplinary Action, Unauthorised Use of Company Property, Speeding Offences
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation for Late Filing Review of Arbitration Award Disciplinary Action Unauthorised Use of Company Property Speeding Offences

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Serogole Donald Maditse

Applicant

CCMA

Respondent

Seele Mokoena N.O

Respondent

Esmoene Ceiling CC

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application for Condonation and Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether condonation for the late filing of the review application should be granted.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitrator committed a reviewable irregularity in finding the dismissal procedurally and substantively fair.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's contract precluded disciplinary action for traffic offences.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the significant delay in filing the review application. Even if the explanation were accepted, the applicant's prospects of success were minimal, as he did not establish that the arbitrator's decision was unreasonable or that a reviewable irregularity occurred. The employment contract's indemnity clause did not preclude disciplinary action for unauthorised use of the company vehicle or speeding. The arbitrator's findings were reasonable and supported by the evidence. Accordingly, condonation for the late filing was refused, and the review application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Condonation for the late filing of the review application is refused. The review application is dismissed.

Orders

  • Condonation for the late filing of the review application is refused.
  • The review application is dismissed.