Philander v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (C589/99) [2000] ZALC 71 (7 August 2000)

Philander v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (C589/99) [2000] ZALC 71 (7 August 2000)

The Labour Court found that the Commissioner committed a gross irregularity by failing to appreciate the evidence before him, particularly regarding the reasons for the delay, which were attributable to the applicant's attorneys and not to ignorance of the law. The Commissioner failed to consider whether the error by the attorneys could be excused and did not properly assess whether the applicant himself was at fault. Furthermore, the Commissioner relied on irrelevant provisions of the Labour Relations Act and failed to allow the parties to present proper evidence. The Court held that these failures justified reviewing and setting aside the Commissioner's determination. However, the Court...

Citation
[2000] ZALC 71
Parties
Applicant: Clarence Philander; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Other; Respondent: Val U Flavours
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 August 2000
Case Number
C589/99
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application to Review and Set Aside CCMA Condonation Refusal
Outcome
Application to review and set aside the CCMA condonation refusal is granted. The condonation application must be reconsidered by a different Commissioner. Costs awarded against the third respondent.
Judges
Waglay
Legal Topics
Condonation, Unfair Dismissal, Review of Arbitral Award, Procedural Irregularity
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Unfair Dismissal Review of Arbitral Award Procedural Irregularity

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Clarence Philander

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Other

Respondent

Val U Flavours

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application to Review and Set Aside CCMA Condonation Refusal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Commissioner committed a gross irregularity in refusing condonation for late referral of the unfair dismissal dispute.
  2. 2 Whether the Commissioner properly considered the evidence and arguments before him.
  3. 3 Whether the Labour Court should substitute its own decision for that of the CCMA on condonation.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Court found that the Commissioner committed a gross irregularity by failing to appreciate the evidence before him, particularly regarding the reasons for the delay, which were attributable to the applicant's attorneys and not to ignorance of the law. The Commissioner failed to consider whether the error by the attorneys could be excused and did not properly assess whether the applicant himself was at fault. Furthermore, the Commissioner relied on irrelevant provisions of the Labour Relations Act and failed to allow the parties to present proper evidence. The Court held that these failures justified reviewing and setting aside the Commissioner's determination. However, the Court...

Court Disposition

Application to review and set aside the CCMA condonation refusal is granted. The condonation application must be reconsidered by a different Commissioner. Costs awarded against the third respondent.

Orders

  • The decision of the second respondent under first respondent's case number C589/99 is reviewed and set aside.
  • The first respondent is ordered to consider the condonation application afresh and a Commissioner other than the second respondent must be allocated.