MEC for Economic Development Gauteng v General Public Services Sectoral Bargaining Council and Another (J856/2011) [2017] ZALCJHB 21 (27 January 2017)

MEC for Economic Development Gauteng v General Public Services Sectoral Bargaining Council and Another (J856/2011) [2017] ZALCJHB 21 (27 January 2017)

The court found that the applicant failed to comply with a directive to file the transcript and reasons for the judgment, and had not taken any steps to pursue the application for leave to appeal. This conduct indicated an intention not to prosecute the application. The application was therefore fatally defective and stood to be dismissed. The court exercised its discretion to dismiss the application for leave to appeal and made no order as to costs.

Citation
[2017] ZALCJHB 21
Parties
Applicant: MEC FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GAUTENG; Respondent: GENERAL PUBLIC SERVICES SECTORAL BARGAINING COUNCIL; Respondent: ZS SIBEKO N.O; Respondent: LIBUSENG MONGOYA-BOMVANA
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
27 January 2017
Case Number
J856/2011
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Condonation for Late Filing of Rescission Application.
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed; no order as to costs.
Judges
F Coetzee
Legal Topics
Condonation, Leave to Appeal, Rescission Application, Court Directives, Costs Order
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Leave to Appeal Rescission Application Court Directives Costs Order

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MEC FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GAUTENG

Applicant

GENERAL PUBLIC SERVICES SECTORAL BARGAINING COUNCIL

Respondent

ZS SIBEKO N.O

Respondent

LIBUSENG MONGOYA-BOMVANA

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Condonation for Late Filing of Rescission Application.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's application for leave to appeal should be entertained despite non-compliance with a court directive.
  2. 2 Whether the failure to file the transcript and reasons for judgment renders the application fatally defective.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to comply with a directive to file the transcript and reasons for the judgment, and had not taken any steps to pursue the application for leave to appeal. This conduct indicated an intention not to prosecute the application. The application was therefore fatally defective and stood to be dismissed. The court exercised its discretion to dismiss the application for leave to appeal and made no order as to costs.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

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