Mould v Roopa NO and Others (JR 822/01) [2002] ZALC 70; [2003] 1 BLLR 38 (LC); (2002) 23 ILJ 2076 (LC) (26 August 2002)

Mould v Roopa NO and Others (JR 822/01) [2002] ZALC 70; [2003] 1 BLLR 38 (LC); (2002) 23 ILJ 2076 (LC) (26 August 2002)

The Labour Court held that the Commissioner correctly refused condonation for the late referral to arbitration. The certificate of non-resolution was properly issued when made available to the applicant, and stamping or filing with the CCMA was not required. The applicant's delay in filing the referral was not satisfactorily explained, and the minimal period of delay did not excuse the lack of a proper explanation. The Commissioner was entitled to accept the authority of the third respondent's representative, as retrospective ratification was permissible. The applicant failed to provide sufficient detail regarding the prospects of success, both substantively and procedurally, and his bare...

Citation
[2002] ZALC 70
Parties
Applicant: Trevor Owen Mould; Respondent: Mr. P Roopa N.O.; Respondent: The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation & Arbitration; Respondent: Lonmin Platinum Limited also known as Lonmin Platinum and/or Lonmin Platinum Mines
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 August 2002
Case Number
JR 822/01
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Review of CCMA Condonation Ruling
Outcome
Application for review dismissed with costs.
Judges
Pillay D
Legal Topics
Condonation, Late Referral, Prospects of Success, Procedural Fairness, Authority of Affidavit, Review of Arbitration Ruling
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Late Referral Prospects of Success Procedural Fairness Authority of Affidavit Review of Arbitration Ruling

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 5 Authorities cited 26 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Trevor Owen Mould

Applicant

Mr. P Roopa N.O.

Respondent

The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation & Arbitration

Respondent

Lonmin Platinum Limited also known as Lonmin Platinum and/or Lonmin Platinum Mines

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Review of CCMA Condonation Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Commissioner erred in refusing condonation for late referral to arbitration.
  2. 2 Whether the referral to arbitration was in fact late and whether condonation was necessary.
  3. 3 Whether the Commissioner relied on inadmissible or unauthorised evidence in assessing prospects of success.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Court held that the Commissioner correctly refused condonation for the late referral to arbitration. The certificate of non-resolution was properly issued when made available to the applicant, and stamping or filing with the CCMA was not required. The applicant's delay in filing the referral was not satisfactorily explained, and the minimal period of delay did not excuse the lack of a proper explanation. The Commissioner was entitled to accept the authority of the third respondent's representative, as retrospective ratification was permissible. The applicant failed to provide sufficient detail regarding the prospects of success, both substantively and procedurally, and his bare...

Court Disposition

Application for review dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for review is dismissed.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of the application.