Overseas Work and Leisure Services CC v Matzdorff NO and Another (11001/2016) [2017] ZAWCHC 89 (11 August 2017)

Overseas Work and Leisure Services CC v Matzdorff NO and Another (11001/2016) [2017] ZAWCHC 89 (11 August 2017)

The court held that the arbitrator did not commit a gross irregularity in the conduct of the arbitration proceedings. The arbitrator considered the relevant statutory provisions and case law, and any alleged errors in interpretation or application of the law were errors on the merits, not reviewable irregularities. The applicant was afforded a fair hearing, and the arbitrator's findings regarding the levies and wasted costs were based on the evidence and submissions presented. The court rejected the applicant's argument that the arbitrator failed to apply binding authority, finding that the arbitrator's approach was consistent with the jurisprudence governing review of arbitration awards....

Citation
[2017] ZAWCHC 89
Parties
Applicant: Overseas Work and Leisure Services CC; Respondent: Terence Matzdorff N.O.; Respondent: Pepper Club Body Corporate
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 August 2017
Case Number
11001/2016
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application for Review and Setting Aside of Arbitration Award Under Section 32(1) of the Arbitration Act 42 of 1965
Outcome
The application for review is dismissed. The corrected arbitration award is made an order of court. Costs are awarded against the applicant.
Judges
Davis
Legal Topics
Arbitration Review, Gross Irregularity, Sectional Titles Act, Wasted Costs, Arbitrator Jurisdiction
Civil Procedure Alternative Dispute Resolution Arbitration Review Gross Irregularity Sectional Titles Act Wasted Costs Arbitrator Jurisdiction

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Overseas Work and Leisure Services CC

Applicant

Terence Matzdorff N.O.

Respondent

Pepper Club Body Corporate

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application for Review and Setting Aside of Arbitration Award Under Section 32(1) of the Arbitration Act 42 of 1965

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrator committed a gross irregularity in the conduct of the arbitration proceedings.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitrator failed to apply binding High Court authority regarding section 37(2) of the Sectional Titles Act.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator awarded an incorrect amount for levies and interest.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the arbitrator did not commit a gross irregularity in the conduct of the arbitration proceedings. The arbitrator considered the relevant statutory provisions and case law, and any alleged errors in interpretation or application of the law were errors on the merits, not reviewable irregularities. The applicant was afforded a fair hearing, and the arbitrator's findings regarding the levies and wasted costs were based on the evidence and submissions presented. The court rejected the applicant's argument that the arbitrator failed to apply binding authority, finding that the arbitrator's approach was consistent with the jurisprudence governing review of arbitration awards....

Court Disposition

The application for review is dismissed. The corrected arbitration award is made an order of court. Costs are awarded against the applicant.

Orders

  • The application fails, and the applicant is ordered to pay the costs.
  • The second respondent's counterapplication is upheld: the corrected arbitration award dated 10 June 2016, as amended on 14 July 2016, is made an order of court in terms of section 31 of the Arbitration Act 42 of 1965.