Ntombela v Herridge Hire & Haul CC and Another (D359/97) [1998] ZALC 111 (13 November 1998)

Ntombela v Herridge Hire & Haul CC and Another (D359/97) [1998] ZALC 111 (13 November 1998)

The Labour Court found that the respondents were aware of the arbitration award and the subsequent court order, having been served and notified both personally and through the applicant's attorneys. The respondents failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for their delay in seeking review and rescission, and their arguments regarding improper service were rejected as the documents reached them. The court held that Mr Herridge, as a member and de facto director of the close corporation, was personally aware of the order and chose not to comply, demonstrating wilful and mala fide disobedience. The requirements for contempt of court were met beyond reasonable doubt. The court emphasized...

Citation
[1998] ZALC 111
Parties
Applicant: M H Ntombela; Respondent: Herridge Hire & Haul CC; Respondent: J Herridge
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 November 1998
Case Number
D359/97
Procedural Posture
Contempt Application / Judgment After Applications for Condonation, Rescission, Review, and Contempt
Outcome
Application for condonation, review, and rescission dismissed with costs. Second respondent found guilty of contempt of court and sentenced to a fine and suspended imprisonment, conditional on reinstatement of the applicant.
Judges
Landman
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Reinstatement, Arbitration Award Enforcement, Condonation, Rescission of Judgment
Labour Law Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Reinstatement Arbitration Award Enforcement Condonation Rescission of Judgment

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M H Ntombela

Applicant

Herridge Hire & Haul CC

Respondent

J Herridge

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Contempt Application / Judgment After Applications for Condonation, Rescission, Review, and Contempt

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents are entitled to condonation for the late filing of an application for review and rescission of the Labour Court order.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitration award and subsequent court order were properly served and whether the respondents had knowledge of them.
  3. 3 Whether Mr Herridge is guilty of contempt of court for failing to comply with the Labour Court order to reinstate the applicant.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Court found that the respondents were aware of the arbitration award and the subsequent court order, having been served and notified both personally and through the applicant's attorneys. The respondents failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for their delay in seeking review and rescission, and their arguments regarding improper service were rejected as the documents reached them. The court held that Mr Herridge, as a member and de facto director of the close corporation, was personally aware of the order and chose not to comply, demonstrating wilful and mala fide disobedience. The requirements for contempt of court were met beyond reasonable doubt. The court emphasized...

Court Disposition

Application for condonation, review, and rescission dismissed with costs. Second respondent found guilty of contempt of court and sentenced to a fine and suspended imprisonment, conditional on reinstatement of the applicant.

Orders

  • The combined application of the respondents for condonation, review, and rescission is dismissed with costs.
  • The second respondent is guilty of contempt of this Court.