POPCRU and Another v Muthukwane NO and Others (JR1771/16) [2019] ZALCJHB 248 (13 September 2019)

POPCRU and Another v Muthukwane NO and Others (JR1771/16) [2019] ZALCJHB 248 (13 September 2019)

The court found that the applicants provided a reasonable, albeit not flawless, explanation for the delay in filing the review application. The prejudice to the applicants if condonation were refused would be severe, while the respondent did not demonstrate any prejudice if condonation were granted. The applicants showed good prospects of success, and the collective consideration of all factors supported granting condonation. However, the applicants failed to establish valid grounds for review, as they did not set out factual averments or demonstrate how the arbitrator acted irregularly. The arbitrator had properly considered the evidence and issued a reasonable award. Consequently, the...

Citation
[2019] ZALCJHB 248
Parties
Applicant: POPCRU; Applicant: SS Ndlovu; Respondent: Jackson Muthukwane, N.O.; Respondent: Safety and Security Sectoral Bargaining Council; Respondent: South African Police Services
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 September 2019
Case Number
JR1771/16
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review and Condonation
Outcome
Condonation for the late filing of the review application is granted. The review application is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Judges
Z Lallie
Legal Topics
Condonation of Late Filing, Review of Arbitration Award, Procedural Fairness, Substantive Fairness, Disciplinary Dismissal
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation of Late Filing Review of Arbitration Award Procedural Fairness Substantive Fairness Disciplinary Dismissal

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

POPCRU

Applicant

SS Ndlovu

Applicant

Jackson Muthukwane, N.O.

Respondent

Safety and Security Sectoral Bargaining Council

Respondent

South African Police Services

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review and Condonation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have shown good cause for condonation of the late filing of the review application.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitration award is reviewable on the grounds advanced by the applicants.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator committed reviewable irregularities in the conduct of the arbitration.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants provided a reasonable, albeit not flawless, explanation for the delay in filing the review application. The prejudice to the applicants if condonation were refused would be severe, while the respondent did not demonstrate any prejudice if condonation were granted. The applicants showed good prospects of success, and the collective consideration of all factors supported granting condonation. However, the applicants failed to establish valid grounds for review, as they did not set out factual averments or demonstrate how the arbitrator acted irregularly. The arbitrator had properly considered the evidence and issued a reasonable award. Consequently, the...

Court Disposition

Condonation for the late filing of the review application is granted. The review application is dismissed. No order as to costs.

Orders

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