Num obo Gogomo v Greymo Construction CC (C192/2020) [2023] ZALCCT 13 (11 April 2023)

Num obo Gogomo v Greymo Construction CC (C192/2020) [2023] ZALCCT 13 (11 April 2023)

The Court found that the applicant failed to provide any explanation for the nine-month delay in filing the referral to the Labour Court and for the further delay in applying for condonation, despite a directive to do so. The applicant did not take the Court into confidence regarding the true extent of the delay, and the founding affidavit was misleading as to the period of delay and the prejudice suffered. The negligence of the applicant's attorney was compounded by the failure to act promptly after being advised by the respondent. In these circumstances, the Court held that there was no basis to grant condonation, and there was no need to consider the prospects of success in the main...

Citation
[2023] ZALCCT 13
Parties
Applicant: NUM obo Siyabulela Gogomo; Respondent: Greymo Construction CC
Court
Labour Court Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 April 2023
Case Number
C192/2020
Procedural Posture
Condonation Application / Opposed Application for Condonation for Late Referral
Outcome
Application for condonation dismissed.
Judges
Rabkin-Naicker
Legal Topics
Condonation for Late Referral, Jurisdiction of Bargaining Council, Unprotected Work Stoppage, Prejudice, Delay in Filing, Labour Court Rules
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation for Late Referral Jurisdiction of Bargaining Council Unprotected Work Stoppage Prejudice Delay in Filing Labour Court Rules

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

NUM obo Siyabulela Gogomo

Applicant

Greymo Construction CC

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Condonation Application / Opposed Application for Condonation for Late Referral

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether condonation should be granted for the late referral of the statement of case to the Labour Court.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay in filing the referral and condonation application.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent suffered prejudice due to the delay.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the applicant failed to provide any explanation for the nine-month delay in filing the referral to the Labour Court and for the further delay in applying for condonation, despite a directive to do so. The applicant did not take the Court into confidence regarding the true extent of the delay, and the founding affidavit was misleading as to the period of delay and the prejudice suffered. The negligence of the applicant's attorney was compounded by the failure to act promptly after being advised by the respondent. In these circumstances, the Court held that there was no basis to grant condonation, and there was no need to consider the prospects of success in the main...

Court Disposition

Application for condonation dismissed.

Orders

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