Makgotlho v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR 1009/11) [2012] ZALCJHB 108 (26 January 2012)

Makgotlho v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR 1009/11) [2012] ZALCJHB 108 (26 January 2012)

The applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the excessive delay in referring his dispute to the bargaining council, merely stating that his studies were the cause without elaboration. He also failed to provide sufficient details regarding the circumstances of his dismissal or demonstrate any...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2012] ZALCJHB 108
Parties
Applicant: Calvin Popi Makgotlho; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: A Pieters N.O; Respondent: Exxaro Resource
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 January 2012
Case Number
JR 1009/11
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed with no order as to costs.
Judges
Molahlehi
Legal Topics
Condonation, Late Referral, Prospects of Success, Review of Arbitration Award
Labour Law Condonation Late Referral Prospects of Success Review of Arbitration Award

Source-derived case record

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Calvin Popi Makgotlho

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

A Pieters N.O

Respondent

Exxaro Resource

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the commissioner erred in refusing condonation for the late referral of the applicant's dispute to the bargaining council.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant provided sufficient explanation for the delay.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant demonstrated prospects of success in the underlying dispute.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the excessive delay in referring his dispute to the bargaining council, merely stating that his studies were the cause without elaboration. He also failed to provide sufficient details regarding the circumstances of his dismissal or demonstrate any prospects of success in the underlying dispute. The commissioner was therefore correct in refusing condonation, as the applicant did not meet the requirements for condonation under the Labour Relations Act and relevant case law. There was no basis for the Labour Court to interfere with the commissioner's ruling.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The applicant's review application is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.