Maharaj v Education Labour Relations Council and Others (D1718/18) [2021] ZALCD 6 (8 July 2021)

Maharaj v Education Labour Relations Council and Others (D1718/18) [2021] ZALCD 6 (8 July 2021)

The court found that the applicant's delay of 23 days in filing the record and transcript for the review application was not excessive and was adequately explained. The explanation, which was not disputed by any respondent, detailed the difficulties in locating the record and the applicant's financial constraints. The founding affidavit also set out reasonable prospects of success in the review application. As there was no opposition and the requirements for condonation were met, the court granted the relief sought, reinstating the review application and condoning the late filing.

Citation
[2021] ZALCD 6
Parties
Applicant: Rajendra Budhoo Maharaj; Respondent: Education Labour Relations Council; Respondent: Commissioner Anand Dorasamy; Respondent: MEC: The Department of Education for the Province of KwaZulu Natal
Court
Labour Court Durban
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 July 2021
Case Number
D1718/18
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application to Reinstate Review and Condonation for Late Filing
Outcome
The review application is reinstated and the applicant's non-compliance with the time periods is condoned. No order as to costs.
Judges
MG Maeso
Legal Topics
Condonation of Late Filing, Review of Arbitration Award, Practice Manual Rule 7a6, Reinstatement of Review Application
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation of Late Filing Review of Arbitration Award Practice Manual Rule 7a6 Reinstatement of Review Application

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rajendra Budhoo Maharaj

Applicant

Education Labour Relations Council

Respondent

Commissioner Anand Dorasamy

Respondent

MEC: The Department of Education for the Province of KwaZulu Natal

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application to Reinstate Review and Condonation for Late Filing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's delay in filing the record and transcript for the review application should be condoned.
  2. 2 Whether the review application should be reinstated after being archived due to non-compliance with time periods.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant provided a reasonable explanation for the delay.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's delay of 23 days in filing the record and transcript for the review application was not excessive and was adequately explained. The explanation, which was not disputed by any respondent, detailed the difficulties in locating the record and the applicant's financial constraints. The founding affidavit also set out reasonable prospects of success in the review application. As there was no opposition and the requirements for condonation were met, the court granted the relief sought, reinstating the review application and condoning the late filing.

Court Disposition

The review application is reinstated and the applicant's non-compliance with the time periods is condoned. No order as to costs.

Orders

  • The review application under case number D1718/18 is removed from the archives and reinstated.
  • The applicant's non-compliance with the time periods contemplated by Rule 7A(6) read with Practice Directive 11.2.2 is condoned.