Mhlabane v Staff U Need and Others (JR1627/17) [2022] ZALCJHB 14 (1 February 2022)

Mhlabane v Staff U Need and Others (JR1627/17) [2022] ZALCJHB 14 (1 February 2022)

The court found that the applicant failed to file a complete or reconstructed record of the in limine proceedings, despite being given an additional sixty days to do so. The record was too incomplete to allow the court to determine the actual date of dismissal or to adjudicate the review application. The applicant did not approach the Judge President for directions regarding the missing portions of the record. There is no reasonable prospect that another court would find the record sufficient or that the applicant should be afforded a further opportunity to submit a complete record, especially since such an opportunity had already been granted.

Citation
[2022] ZALCJHB 14
Parties
Applicant: Kgotong Dickson Mhlabane; Respondent: Staff U Need; Respondent: Rotek Industries; Respondent: J Mashaba N.O.; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 February 2022
Case Number
JR1627/17
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment on Review
Outcome
Leave to appeal is refused.
Judges
M J Van As
Legal Topics
Review Application Record, Leave to Appeal, Practice Manual Compliance
Labour Law Civil Procedure Review Application Record Leave to Appeal Practice Manual Compliance

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

Kgotong Dickson Mhlabane

Applicant

Staff U Need

Respondent

Rotek Industries

Respondent

J Mashaba N.O.

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment on Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant provided a complete or reconstructed record as required for the review application.
  2. 2 Whether there is a reasonable prospect that another court would find the record sufficient to adjudicate the review application.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant should have approached the Judge President for directions regarding the missing record.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to file a complete or reconstructed record of the in limine proceedings, despite being given an additional sixty days to do so. The record was too incomplete to allow the court to determine the actual date of dismissal or to adjudicate the review application. The applicant did not approach the Judge President for directions regarding the missing portions of the record. There is no reasonable prospect that another court would find the record sufficient or that the applicant should be afforded a further opportunity to submit a complete record, especially since such an opportunity had already been granted.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal is refused.

Orders

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