Ntombela v Safety and Security Sector Bargaining Council and Others (JR2221/14) [2017] ZALCJHB 195 (20 March 2017)

Ntombela v Safety and Security Sector Bargaining Council and Others (JR2221/14) [2017] ZALCJHB 195 (20 March 2017)

The court found that the delay in filing the review application was excessive, being almost six months beyond the prescribed six-week period. The applicant's explanation, which relied solely on the union's failure to communicate, was inadequate as he did not demonstrate any personal effort to follow up or ensure progress. The law requires applicants, even when represented, to make regular enquiries regarding their matters. The applicant's passive approach did not satisfy the requirements for condonation. Accordingly, condonation for the late filing was refused and the review application dismissed.

Citation
[2017] ZALCJHB 195
Parties
Applicant: Sello Michael Ntombela; Respondent: Safety and Security Sector Bargaining Council; Respondent: Joyce Nkopane N.O; Respondent: South African Police Services
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 March 2017
Case Number
JR 2221/14
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application for Condonation for Late Filing of Review; Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
Condonation for the late filing of the review application is refused; the review application is dismissed.
Judges
Van Niekerk
Legal Topics
Condonation, Review of Arbitration Award, Delay in Filing, Trade Union Representation
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Review of Arbitration Award Delay in Filing Trade Union Representation

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sello Michael Ntombela

Applicant

Safety and Security Sector Bargaining Council

Respondent

Joyce Nkopane N.O

Respondent

South African Police Services

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application for Condonation for Late Filing of Review; Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether condonation should be granted for the late filing of the review application.
  2. 2 Whether the explanation for the delay is adequate.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant took reasonable steps to pursue the review.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the delay in filing the review application was excessive, being almost six months beyond the prescribed six-week period. The applicant's explanation, which relied solely on the union's failure to communicate, was inadequate as he did not demonstrate any personal effort to follow up or ensure progress. The law requires applicants, even when represented, to make regular enquiries regarding their matters. The applicant's passive approach did not satisfy the requirements for condonation. Accordingly, condonation for the late filing was refused and the review application dismissed.

Court Disposition

Condonation for the late filing of the review application is refused; the review application is dismissed.

Orders

  • Condonation for the late filing of the review application is refused.
  • The review application is dismissed.