Nordisk v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR214/01) [2009] ZALCJHB 63 (18 September 2009)

Nordisk v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR214/01) [2009] ZALCJHB 63 (18 September 2009)

The applicant failed to provide a reasonable and acceptable explanation for the delay in filing the reconstructed arbitration record as required by the Labour Appeal Court order. Instead of addressing its own non-compliance, the applicant attempted to shift blame to the employee and his representative. The court...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] ZALCJHB 63
Parties
Applicant: Novo Nordisk; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Joyce Tohlang N.O.; Respondent: Thulani Manqele
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 September 2009
Case Number
JR214/01
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application for Condonation for Late Filing of Reconstructed Arbitration Record; Application to Make Arbitration Award an Order of Court
Outcome
Application for condonation dismissed; arbitration award made an order of court; no order as to costs.
Judges
Molahlehi
Legal Topics
Condonation, Arbitration Award Enforcement, Review of Arbitration Award, Hearsay Evidence, Reconstruction of Record
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Arbitration Award Enforcement Review of Arbitration Award Hearsay Evidence Reconstruction of Record

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Novo Nordisk

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Joyce Tohlang N.O.

Respondent

Thulani Manqele

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application for Condonation for Late Filing of Reconstructed Arbitration Record; Application to Make Arbitration Award an Order of Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has shown good cause for condonation of the late filing of the reconstructed arbitration record.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitration award should be made an order of court despite the pending review application.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay and demonstrated prospects of success in the review.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to provide a reasonable and acceptable explanation for the delay in filing the reconstructed arbitration record as required by the Labour Appeal Court order. Instead of addressing its own non-compliance, the applicant attempted to shift blame to the employee and his representative. The court found that the employee was correct in insisting on an extension before proceeding with reconstruction, and that the applicant's conduct demonstrated a lack of urgency and disregard for the court's directives. The applicant also failed to address the authority of its attorney to depose to the founding affidavit and did not substantiate its prospects of success beyond listing...

Court Disposition

Application for condonation dismissed; arbitration award made an order of court; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The applicant's condonation application for the late filing of the reconstructed arbitration record is dismissed.
  • The arbitration award issued by the second respondent under case number GA76865 and dated 26 January 2001 is made an order of the court.