Mhlongo v Netball South Africa (071849/2024) [2025] ZAGPPHC 727 (8 July 2025)

Mhlongo v Netball South Africa (071849/2024) [2025] ZAGPPHC 727 (8 July 2025)

The court found that the respondent's Constitution contains a mandatory arbitration clause requiring disputes to be referred to mediation or arbitration before approaching the court. The applicant failed to comply with this prerequisite. The respondent properly raised the jurisdictional objection in its answering affidavit, and the court was satisfied that the point in limine was appropriately considered. The court held that the application should be stayed pending arbitration, as the applicant's dispute falls squarely within the ambit of the arbitration clause. The applicant was ordered to pay the costs of the points in limine.

Citation
[2025] ZAGPPHC 727
Parties
Applicant: Joseph Taylor Mhlongo; Respondent: Netball South Africa
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 July 2025
Case Number
071849/2024
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Application for Stay of Proceedings Pending Arbitration
Outcome
Application stayed pending arbitration; costs awarded against applicant on points in limine.
Judges
Nyathi
Legal Topics
Arbitration Clause Enforcement, Stay of Proceedings, Jurisdictional Objection, Declaratory Relief
Civil Procedure Alternative Dispute Resolution Arbitration Clause Enforcement Stay of Proceedings Jurisdictional Objection Declaratory Relief

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph Taylor Mhlongo

Applicant

Netball South Africa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Stay Application / Application for Stay of Proceedings Pending Arbitration

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court has jurisdiction to hear the matter in light of the mandatory arbitration clause in the respondent's Constitution.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant was required to refer the dispute to mediation or arbitration before approaching the court.
  3. 3 Whether the points in limine raised by the respondent justify a stay of proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent's Constitution contains a mandatory arbitration clause requiring disputes to be referred to mediation or arbitration before approaching the court. The applicant failed to comply with this prerequisite. The respondent properly raised the jurisdictional objection in its answering affidavit, and the court was satisfied that the point in limine was appropriately considered. The court held that the application should be stayed pending arbitration, as the applicant's dispute falls squarely within the ambit of the arbitration clause. The applicant was ordered to pay the costs of the points in limine.

Court Disposition

Application stayed pending arbitration; costs awarded against applicant on points in limine.

Orders

  • The application is stayed pending the final determination of the disputes on the pleadings between the parties by an arbitrator in terms of Paragraph 31 of the March 2023 Constitution.
  • The applicant shall pay the costs of the points in limine on the party and party scale, including the costs of counsel at scale B.