Mansoor v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (J4/99) [1999] ZALC 150 (23 September 1999)

Mansoor v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (J4/99) [1999] ZALC 150 (23 September 1999)

The court found that the applicant failed to provide a proper and satisfactory explanation for the delay in referring his dismissal dispute to the CCMA. As a director, he was familiar with labour relations procedures and should have known the statutory requirements. The evidence showed that the delay was excessive and not justified by any circumstances beyond the applicant's control. The commissioner exercised his discretion judicially and gave reasons, albeit brief, which were sufficient in law. The applicant was not prejudiced by the brevity of the reasons, and no gross irregularity was committed. The application to review and set aside the commissioner's refusal of condonation was...

Citation
[1999] ZALC 150
Parties
Applicant: Dawood Goolam Hoosen Mansoor; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Mbileni, CS N.O.; Respondent: Gallo (Africa) Limited
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 September 1999
Case Number
J4/99
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application to Review and Set Aside CCMA Condonation Refusal
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
E Revelas
Legal Topics
Condonation, Late Referral, Section 191 Lra, Review of Ccma Decision
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Late Referral Section 191 Lra Review of Ccma Decision

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dawood Goolam Hoosen Mansoor

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Mbileni, CS N.O.

Respondent

Gallo (Africa) Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application to Review and Set Aside CCMA Condonation Refusal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant provided sufficient explanation for the late referral of his dismissal dispute to the CCMA.
  2. 2 Whether the CCMA commissioner exercised his discretion judicially in refusing condonation for the late referral.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant was prejudiced by the brief reasons given by the commissioner.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to provide a proper and satisfactory explanation for the delay in referring his dismissal dispute to the CCMA. As a director, he was familiar with labour relations procedures and should have known the statutory requirements. The evidence showed that the delay was excessive and not justified by any circumstances beyond the applicant's control. The commissioner exercised his discretion judicially and gave reasons, albeit brief, which were sufficient in law. The applicant was not prejudiced by the brevity of the reasons, and no gross irregularity was committed. The application to review and set aside the commissioner's refusal of condonation was...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application to review and set aside the CCMA commissioner's refusal of condonation is dismissed.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of the application.