Mayatula v Film and Publication Board and Others (JR 286/2012) [2013] ZALCJHB 268 (18 October 2013)

Mayatula v Film and Publication Board and Others (JR 286/2012) [2013] ZALCJHB 268 (18 October 2013)

The court found that the applicant failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the delay in filing the review application, as she did not disclose when she first approached her legal insurance company or what steps she took to expedite the process. Furthermore, the court held that the arbitrator had carefully considered the evidence and correctly distinguished between the initial contract and the subsequent fixed term contracts. The arbitrator's finding that there was no reasonable expectation of renewal was supported by unchallenged evidence that the employer had sufficient personnel to address the backlog, and the applicant's union only recommended a short-term return for handover...

Citation
[2013] ZALCJHB 268
Parties
Applicant: Mayatula Siphokazi; Respondent: Film and Publication Board; Respondent: Faizel Mooi N.O.; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 October 2013
Case Number
JR286/2012
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application for Condonation and Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
Application for condonation for the late filing of the review application is dismissed.
Judges
M J Van As
Legal Topics
Condonation for Late Filing, Reasonable Expectation of Renewal, Fixed Term Contracts, Reviewable Irregularity, Arbitration Award Review
Labour Law Condonation for Late Filing Reasonable Expectation of Renewal Fixed Term Contracts Reviewable Irregularity Arbitration Award Review

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mayatula Siphokazi

Applicant

Film and Publication Board

Respondent

Faizel Mooi N.O.

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application for Condonation and Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant provided a reasonable explanation for the late filing of the review application.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant had reasonable prospects of success in the review application.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator committed a reviewable irregularity in finding that the applicant did not have a reasonable expectation of renewal of her fixed term contract.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the delay in filing the review application, as she did not disclose when she first approached her legal insurance company or what steps she took to expedite the process. Furthermore, the court held that the arbitrator had carefully considered the evidence and correctly distinguished between the initial contract and the subsequent fixed term contracts. The arbitrator's finding that there was no reasonable expectation of renewal was supported by unchallenged evidence that the employer had sufficient personnel to address the backlog, and the applicant's union only recommended a short-term return for handover...

Court Disposition

Application for condonation for the late filing of the review application is dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for condonation for the late filing of the review application is dismissed.
  • There is no order as to costs.