Mlungu v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1865/19) [2021] ZALCJHB 296 (22 September 2021)
- Citation
- [2021] ZALCJHB 296
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- Labour Court Johannesburg
- Panel
- Tlhotlhalemaje
- Case number
- JR1865/19
More details
- Court
- Labour Court Johannesburg
- Panel
- Tlhotlhalemaje
- Case number
- JR1865/19
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Court found that the applicant failed to comply with the procedural requirements for an application for leave to appeal, specifically the obligation to file written submissions within ten days of lodging the application. As a result, the application was defective and not properly before the Court. The Court dismissed the application for leave to appeal on this basis.
Court disposition
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Orders
- The applicant’s application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
- There is no order as to costs.
02
Material facts
Parties
Sibonile Mlungu
ApplicantCommission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration
RespondentZanele Sibaya N.O.
RespondentImpala Platinum Limited
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Review Application
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the applicant's application for leave to appeal is properly before the Court.
- 02
Whether the failure to file written submissions within the prescribed period renders the application defective.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant sought leave to appeal the dismissal of his review application regarding the refusal of condonation for late referral of an unfair dismissal dispute. No written submissions in support of the leave to appeal were filed as required by the rules.
- Respondent
- The respondents did not file opposing submissions. The Court considered the procedural defect arising from the applicant's failure to comply with the rules regarding written submissions for leave to appeal.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Rule 30(3A) of the Labour Court Rules; Practice Manual paragraph 15.2
An application for leave to appeal must comply with the prescribed rules, including the filing of written submissions within the stipulated period.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Court found that the applicant failed to comply with the procedural requirements for an application for leave to appeal, specifically the obligation to file written submissions within ten days of lodging the application. As a result, the application was defective and not properly before the Court. The Court dismissed the application for leave to appeal on this basis.
Obiter and limits
- The judgment was delivered electronically and published on the Labour Court’s website, reflecting current practice in the Labour Court.
Court disposition
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
- The applicant’s application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
- There is no order as to costs.
Source and reliance status
Labour Court Johannesburg
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Labour Court Johannesburg
Judgment
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG
Not Reportable
JR 1865/19
In the matter between:
SIBONILE MLUNGU Applicant
and
COMMISSION FOR
CONCILIATION
MEDIATION AND ARBITRATION First
Respondent
ZANELE SIBAYA N.O. Second
Respondent
IMPALA PLATINUM LIMITED Third
Respondent
Decided in Chambers:
Delivered: This judgment was handed down electronically by circulation to the parties' legal representatives by email and publication on the Labour Court’s website. The date and time for hand-down is deemed to be 22 September 2021 at …
JUDGMENT:
LEAVE TO APPEAL
TLHOTLHALEMAJE, J
[1] On 13 April 2021, this Court dismissed the applicant’s application to review and set aside the second respondent’s ruling in terms of which his late referral of an alleged unfair dismissal dispute to the first respondent was not condoned.
[2] The applicant has since filed an application for leave to appeal against the order of the Court. The application for leave to appeal was filed on 28 April 2021. In terms of rule 30(3A) of the Rules of this Court read with paragraph 15.2 of the Practice Manual, the applicant ought to have filed his written submission within 10 days from the filing of the application for leave to appeal. As at the writing of this judgment, the applicant had not filed his written submission in support of the leave to appeal. The purported application for leave to appeal is therefore defective and not properly before the Court. In such circumstances, the application ought to be dismissed.
[3] Accordingly, the following order is made;
Order:
1 The applicant’s application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
2. There is no order as to costs.
Edwin Tlhotlhalemaje
Judge of the Labour Court of South Africa
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.