Mohube v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR2406/2019) [2022] ZALCJHB 15 (1 February 2022)

Mohube v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR2406/2019) [2022] ZALCJHB 15 (1 February 2022)

The applicant failed to provide a reasonable and acceptable explanation for the delay in filing the application for leave to appeal and the written submissions. The explanation offered was unsound and demonstrated a lack of awareness of the applicable rules and procedures. The computation of the degree of lateness was incorrect, and the actual delay was nine days. The applicant did not adequately set out prospects of success, and the grounds advanced were either not supported by the pleadings or constituted afterthoughts. The interests of justice do not favour the granting of condonation, and as such, the application for condonation is refused.

Citation
[2022] ZALCJHB 15
Parties
Applicant: Matome Tumi Mohube; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Commissioner Botha N.O.; Respondent: Commissioner Byrne N.O.; Respondent: Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (PRASA)
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 February 2022
Case Number
JR2406/2019
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Condonation Application
Outcome
Condonation application refused.
Judges
M T M Phehane
Legal Topics
Condonation, Leave to Appeal, Review of Arbitration Award, Late Filing, Practice Manual Compliance
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Leave to Appeal Review of Arbitration Award Late Filing 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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Matome Tumi Mohube

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Commissioner Botha N.O.

Respondent

Commissioner Byrne N.O.

Respondent

Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (PRASA)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Condonation Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has provided a reasonable and acceptable explanation for the delay in filing the application for leave to appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has demonstrated prospects of success in the application for leave to appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the interests of justice require that condonation be granted for the late filing of the application for leave to appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to provide a reasonable and acceptable explanation for the delay in filing the application for leave to appeal and the written submissions. The explanation offered was unsound and demonstrated a lack of awareness of the applicable rules and procedures. The computation of the degree of lateness was incorrect, and the actual delay was nine days. The applicant did not adequately set out prospects of success, and the grounds advanced were either not supported by the pleadings or constituted afterthoughts. The interests of justice do not favour the granting of condonation, and as such, the application for condonation is refused.

Court Disposition

Condonation application refused.

Orders

  • The application for condonation is refused.