Msiza and Another v South African Local Government Bargaining Council and Others (JR1263/12) [2017] ZALCJHB 99 (24 March 2017)

Msiza and Another v South African Local Government Bargaining Council and Others (JR1263/12) [2017] ZALCJHB 99 (24 March 2017)

The court found that although the delay in filing the application for leave to appeal was not excessive and condonation could be considered, the applicants failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of Rule 30(3A) and Clause 15.2 of the Practice Manual by not filing the required submissions. Furthermore, the court determined that there were no prospects of success on appeal. As a result, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed for non-compliance and lack of merit.

Citation
[2017] ZALCJHB 99
Parties
Applicant: Msiza, Jan Charly; Applicant: Skosana, Boy Mgiji; Respondent: South African Local Government Bargaining Council; Respondent: Commissioner Thomas Ntimbana; Respondent: Thembisile Hani Municipality
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 March 2017
Case Number
JR1263/12
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Review Judgment
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed for non-compliance with procedural rules and lack of prospects of success.
Judges
Mthombeni
Legal Topics
Condonation of Late Filing, Leave to Appeal Procedure, Practice Manual Compliance
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation of Late Filing Leave to Appeal Procedure 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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Msiza, Jan Charly

Applicant

Skosana, Boy Mgiji

Applicant

South African Local Government Bargaining Council

Respondent

Commissioner Thomas Ntimbana

Respondent

Thembisile Hani Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether condonation for late filing of the application for leave to appeal should be granted.
  2. 2 Whether the application for leave to appeal complies with Rule 30(3A) and Clause 15.2 of the Practice Manual.
  3. 3 Whether there are prospects of success on appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although the delay in filing the application for leave to appeal was not excessive and condonation could be considered, the applicants failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of Rule 30(3A) and Clause 15.2 of the Practice Manual by not filing the required submissions. Furthermore, the court determined that there were no prospects of success on appeal. As a result, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed for non-compliance and lack of merit.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed for non-compliance with procedural rules and lack of prospects of success.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.