Ngcongo v Local Government Bargaining Council and Others (JS820/06) [2016] ZALCJHB 69 (24 February 2016)

Ngcongo v Local Government Bargaining Council and Others (JS820/06) [2016] ZALCJHB 69 (24 February 2016)

The application for review was filed one year and nine months late, which is an inordinate delay. The explanation for the delay, based on the attorney's mistaken reliance on Rule 6, amounts to negligence and is not sufficient to excuse the delay. Even granting the applicant the benefit of the doubt regarding the explanation, the prospects of success are minimal, as the arbitration award was well reasoned and fell within the band of reasonable decisions. The grounds for review merely allege errors in the arbitrator's findings without demonstrating that the award was unreasonable. The applicant also failed to prosecute the application with due diligence over a period of seven years....

Citation
[2016] ZALCJHB 69
Parties
Applicant: Goodwin Ngcongo; Respondent: Local Government Bargaining Council; Respondent: Ms C Webb; Respondent: City of Johannesburg
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 February 2016
Case Number
JS820/06
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application to Review and Set Aside Arbitration Award
Outcome
Application dismissed; no order as to costs.
Judges
Van Niekerk
Legal Topics
Condonation, Review of Arbitration Award, Unfair Dismissal, Delay in Prosecution
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Review of Arbitration Award Unfair Dismissal Delay in Prosecution

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Goodwin Ngcongo

Applicant

Local Government Bargaining Council

Respondent

Ms C Webb

Respondent

City of Johannesburg

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application to Review and Set Aside Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether condonation should be granted for the late filing of the review application.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant has prospects of success in the review of the arbitration award.

Ratio Decidendi

The application for review was filed one year and nine months late, which is an inordinate delay. The explanation for the delay, based on the attorney's mistaken reliance on Rule 6, amounts to negligence and is not sufficient to excuse the delay. Even granting the applicant the benefit of the doubt regarding the explanation, the prospects of success are minimal, as the arbitration award was well reasoned and fell within the band of reasonable decisions. The grounds for review merely allege errors in the arbitrator's findings without demonstrating that the award was unreasonable. The applicant also failed to prosecute the application with due diligence over a period of seven years....

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • There is no order as to costs.