Pilane v Friedman NO and Others (JR1069/17) [2019] ZALCJHB 231 (29 August 2019)

Pilane v Friedman NO and Others (JR1069/17) [2019] ZALCJHB 231 (29 August 2019)

The application for review was filed nine months late, constituting an excessive and inordinate delay. The applicant's explanation, based on his status as a layperson and lack of legal representation, was found inadequate given the extent of the delay. According to established legal principles, without a reasonable and acceptable explanation for the delay, the prospects of success are immaterial. Even if considered, the applicant's prospects of success were minimal, as his complaints did not fall within the statutory definition of unfair labour practice under section 186(2) of the LRA. The arbitrator's decision to dismiss the referral was reasonable. The court, therefore, refused...

Citation
[2019] ZALCJHB 231
Parties
Applicant: Arthur Thabo Pilane; Respondent: Shaam Friedman N.O.; Respondent: Dispute Resolution Centre for Motor Industry Bargaining Council; Respondent: Shafi Service Station
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 August 2019
Case Number
JR1069/17
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application for Condonation and Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
Condonation for the late filing of the review application is refused and the review application is dismissed.
Judges
Van Niekerk
Legal Topics
Condonation, Unfair Labour Practice, Review of Arbitration Award, Late Filing, Jurisdictional Limits
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Unfair Labour Practice Review of Arbitration Award Late Filing Jurisdictional Limits

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

Arthur Thabo Pilane

Applicant

Shaam Friedman N.O.

Respondent

Dispute Resolution Centre for Motor Industry Bargaining Council

Respondent

Shafi Service Station

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application for Condonation and 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 applicant established grounds for review of the arbitration award.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator's decision was unreasonable in dismissing the applicant's claim of unfair labour practices.

Ratio Decidendi

The application for review was filed nine months late, constituting an excessive and inordinate delay. The applicant's explanation, based on his status as a layperson and lack of legal representation, was found inadequate given the extent of the delay. According to established legal principles, without a reasonable and acceptable explanation for the delay, the prospects of success are immaterial. Even if considered, the applicant's prospects of success were minimal, as his complaints did not fall within the statutory definition of unfair labour practice under section 186(2) of the LRA. The arbitrator's decision to dismiss the referral was reasonable. The court, therefore, refused...

Court Disposition

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

Orders

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