Nhlapo v Sambo N.O. and Others (JR1451/2018) [2023] ZALCJHB 169 (18 May 2023)

Nhlapo v Sambo N.O. and Others (JR1451/2018) [2023] ZALCJHB 169 (18 May 2023)

The court found that the applicant failed to provide a compelling, convincing, and comprehensive explanation for the material and lengthy delay in prosecuting the review application. The explanation offered was found to be astonishing, incredible, and bereft of detail, with significant periods left unexplained. The applicant did not demonstrate diligence or active steps to pursue the matter expeditiously, as required by the Practice Manual and the statutory imperative of the Labour Relations Act. The delay was excessive, and the explanation unsatisfactory, rendering the applicant’s prospects of success immaterial. The prejudice to the Department, including potential financial liability...

Citation
[2023] ZALCJHB 169
Parties
Applicant: R S Nhlapo; Respondent: Martin Sambo N.O.; Respondent: The General Public Service Sectoral Bargaining Council; Respondent: The Department of Correctional Services
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 May 2023
Case Number
JR1451/2018
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application for Retrieval and Reinstatement of Review Application After Archiving Due to Delay
Outcome
Application for retrieval and reinstatement of the review application is dismissed.
Judges
Prinsloo
Legal Topics
Condonation, Archiving of Review Application, Practice Manual Compliance, Unfair Labour Practice, Expeditious Dispute Resolution
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Archiving of Review Application Practice Manual Compliance Unfair Labour Practice Expeditious Dispute Resolution

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 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R S Nhlapo

Applicant

Martin Sambo N.O.

Respondent

The General Public Service Sectoral Bargaining Council

Respondent

The Department of Correctional Services

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application for Retrieval and Reinstatement of Review Application After Archiving Due to Delay

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has shown good cause for the retrieval and reinstatement of the archived review application.
  2. 2 Whether the explanation for the delay in prosecuting the review application is reasonable and satisfactory.
  3. 3 Whether the prospects of success in the review application are material given the explanation for delay.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to provide a compelling, convincing, and comprehensive explanation for the material and lengthy delay in prosecuting the review application. The explanation offered was found to be astonishing, incredible, and bereft of detail, with significant periods left unexplained. The applicant did not demonstrate diligence or active steps to pursue the matter expeditiously, as required by the Practice Manual and the statutory imperative of the Labour Relations Act. The delay was excessive, and the explanation unsatisfactory, rendering the applicant’s prospects of success immaterial. The prejudice to the Department, including potential financial liability...

Court Disposition

Application for retrieval and reinstatement of the review application is dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for retrieval and reinstatement of the review application is dismissed.
  • There is no order as to costs.