NUM obo Mbese v Beatrix and Others (JR314/21) [2024] ZALCJHB 466 (22 November 2024)

NUM obo Mbese v Beatrix and Others (JR314/21) [2024] ZALCJHB 466 (22 November 2024)

The applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the three-month delay in filing the review application. The reasons advanced, including reliance on the union, remote working due to Covid-19, and the December holidays, were found to be inadequate and unsupported by sufficient detail. The evidence against the employee, particularly the unchallenged testimony of Mngomezulu, established the misconduct and supported the commissioner’s finding of a substantively fair dismissal. The applicant did not demonstrate prospects of success on review, and the interests of justice did not warrant condonation. Accordingly, the condonation application for late filing was dismissed, and the...

Citation
[2024] ZALCJHB 466
Parties
Applicant: NUM o.b.o. Nicholas Mbede; Respondent: Sibanye Stillwater Beatrix; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Thembekile Nsibanyoni N.O.
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 November 2024
Case Number
JR314/21
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Condonation and Merits of Review
Outcome
Condonation for late delivery of the review application is dismissed; review application cannot proceed.
Judges
M Makhura
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Condonation, Review of Arbitration Award, Late Filing, Prospects of Success
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Condonation Review of Arbitration Award Late Filing Prospects of Success

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

NUM o.b.o. Nicholas Mbede

Applicant

Sibanye Stillwater Beatrix

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Thembekile Nsibanyoni N.O.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Condonation and Merits of Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether condonation should be granted for the late filing of the review application.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has shown good prospects of success in challenging the arbitration award.
  3. 3 Whether the commissioner’s decision was one that a reasonable decision maker could not reach.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the three-month delay in filing the review application. The reasons advanced, including reliance on the union, remote working due to Covid-19, and the December holidays, were found to be inadequate and unsupported by sufficient detail. The evidence against the employee, particularly the unchallenged testimony of Mngomezulu, established the misconduct and supported the commissioner’s finding of a substantively fair dismissal. The applicant did not demonstrate prospects of success on review, and the interests of justice did not warrant condonation. Accordingly, the condonation application for late filing was dismissed, and the...

Court Disposition

Condonation for late delivery of the review application is dismissed; review application cannot proceed.

Orders

  • The condonation application for the late delivery of the record succeeds and the review application is reinstated.
  • The condonation application for the late delivery of the review application is dismissed.