Mangena v Securitas SA (PTY) LTD and Others (JR 1198 / 2019) [2022] ZALCJHB 324 (22 November 2022)

Mangena v Securitas SA (PTY) LTD and Others (JR 1198 / 2019) [2022] ZALCJHB 324 (22 November 2022)

The court held that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different conclusion. The matter involved the application of established principles regarding the threshold for interfering with an arbitration award on review, with no novel issues or legitimate disputes on the law or facts. The applicant was unable to cross the high threshold required for leave to appeal. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed.

Citation
[2022] ZALCJHB 324
Parties
Applicant: Lazarus Mangena; Respondent: Securitas SA (PTY) LTD; Respondent: Neo Moloi N.O; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 November 2022
Case Number
JR 1198 / 2019
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment Delivered on 29 August 2022
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with no order as to costs.
Judges
Prinsloo
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Condonation, Arbitration Review, Reasonable Prospect of Success
Labour Law Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Condonation Arbitration Review Reasonable Prospect 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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lazarus Mangena

Applicant

Securitas SA (PTY) LTD

Respondent

Neo Moloi N.O

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment Delivered on 29 August 2022

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has demonstrated reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different conclusion.
  2. 2 Whether condonation for the late filing of the application for leave to appeal should be granted.
  3. 3 Whether there is a legitimate dispute on the law or factual matrix warranting leave to appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different conclusion. The matter involved the application of established principles regarding the threshold for interfering with an arbitration award on review, with no novel issues or legitimate disputes on the law or facts. The applicant was unable to cross the high threshold required for leave to appeal. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

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