Matsena v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR921/19) [2021] ZALCJHB 282 (2 September 2021)

Matsena v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR921/19) [2021] ZALCJHB 282 (2 September 2021)

The court found that the commissioner properly applied the legal principles governing condonation, including the excessive degree of lateness and the applicant's failure to provide a reasonable and comprehensive explanation for the delay. The applicant did not account for the 70-day period between his release on...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] ZALCJHB 282
Parties
Applicant: Sello Matsena; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Commissioner Bonginkosi Zulu; Respondent: Metrorail Gauteng South
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 September 2021
Case Number
JR921/19
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Opposed Review of CCMA Condonation Ruling
Outcome
Application to review and set aside the condonation ruling is dismissed.
Judges
Davey
Legal Topics
Condonation, Unfair Dismissal, Late Referral, Prospects of Success, Procedural Irregularity
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Unfair Dismissal Late Referral Prospects of Success Procedural Irregularity

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sello Matsena

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Commissioner Bonginkosi Zulu

Respondent

Metrorail Gauteng South

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Opposed Review of CCMA Condonation Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the commissioners refusal of condonation for late referral to the CCMA was reasonable.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay in referring the unfair dismissal dispute.
  3. 3 Whether the commissioner committed a gross irregularity by determining the condonation application on the papers without oral argument.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the commissioner properly applied the legal principles governing condonation, including the excessive degree of lateness and the applicant's failure to provide a reasonable and comprehensive explanation for the delay. The applicant did not account for the 70-day period between his release on bail and the referral of the dispute to the CCMA, and even confirmatory affidavits from supervisors would not have justified the delay. The commissioner was justified in determining the condonation application on the papers, as both parties were legally represented and had an opportunity to object or make submissions. The applicant failed to establish good cause for the late...

Court Disposition

Application to review and set aside the condonation ruling is dismissed.

Orders

  • The application to review and set aside the second respondent's condonation ruling is dismissed.
  • There is no order as to costs.