Ngidi v van der Merwe NO and Others (J2374/13) [2021] ZALCJHB 135 (2 July 2021)

Ngidi v van der Merwe NO and Others (J2374/13) [2021] ZALCJHB 135 (2 July 2021)

The court found that the applicant failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the lengthy delay between September 2019 and March 2020, as the Wits Law Clinic had not accepted instructions and the applicant remained passive without pursuing alternative legal representation. The subsequent actions taken by the current attorneys did not cure the absence of explanation for the earlier period. The court further determined that the grounds for leave to appeal did not demonstrate prospects of success sufficient to justify condonation. Accordingly, the application for condonation was dismissed, and leave to appeal was not granted.

Citation
[2021] ZALCJHB 135
Parties
Applicant: Dumisani Nkosinathi Ngidi; Respondent: Commissioner F J van der Merwe N.O; Respondent: Safety and Security Sectoral Bargaining Council; Respondent: South African Police Service
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 July 2021
Case Number
J2374/13
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Review Application
Outcome
Condonation application dismissed; no order as to costs.
Judges
S Mabaso
Legal Topics
Condonation for Late Filing, Leave to Appeal, Review Application, Delay Explanation
Civil Procedure Labour Law Condonation for Late Filing Leave to Appeal Review Application Delay Explanation

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

Dumisani Nkosinathi Ngidi

Applicant

Commissioner F J van der Merwe N.O

Respondent

Safety and Security Sectoral Bargaining Council

Respondent

South African Police Service

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Review Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has shown good cause for condonation of the late filing of the notice of appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in filing the notice of appeal is adequately explained.
  3. 3 Whether there are prospects of success on appeal justifying the granting of leave.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the lengthy delay between September 2019 and March 2020, as the Wits Law Clinic had not accepted instructions and the applicant remained passive without pursuing alternative legal representation. The subsequent actions taken by the current attorneys did not cure the absence of explanation for the earlier period. The court further determined that the grounds for leave to appeal did not demonstrate prospects of success sufficient to justify condonation. Accordingly, the application for condonation was dismissed, and leave to appeal was not granted.

Court Disposition

Condonation application dismissed; no order as to costs.

Orders

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