Portapa (Pty) Ltd t/a Supabets v CCMA and Others (JR1537/11) [2014] ZALCJHB 484 (8 December 2014)

Portapa (Pty) Ltd t/a Supabets v CCMA and Others (JR1537/11) [2014] ZALCJHB 484 (8 December 2014)

The court found that the applicant was entitled to rescission of the default judgments because its failure to attend hearings was not wilful and resulted from improper service of notices, which were not sent to its attorneys of record as required by the rules. The applicant acted promptly upon learning of the judgments. However, on reconsideration of the review application, the court held that the applicant failed to set out sufficient factual grounds for review in its founding affidavit. The grounds advanced were vague, general, and unsupported by concrete facts, and no supplementary affidavit was filed to cure these defects. The court reaffirmed that review applications must be based on...

Citation
[2014] ZALCJHB 484
Parties
Applicant: Portapa (Pty) Ltd t/a Supabets; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Commissioner Adv Thabang Serero (N.O.); Respondent: Elspeth Mutize
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 December 2014
Case Number
JR1537/11
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Rescission and Review Applications
Outcome
Rescission of default judgments granted; review application dismissed; arbitration award made order of court; costs awarded to third respondent for opposing the review application only.
Judges
Lagrange
Legal Topics
Rescission of Judgment, Default Judgment, Constructive Dismissal, Review of Arbitration Award, Service of Process
Labour Law Civil Procedure Rescission of Judgment Default Judgment Constructive Dismissal Review of Arbitration Award Service of Process

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Portapa (Pty) Ltd t/a Supabets

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Commissioner Adv Thabang Serero (N.O.)

Respondent

Elspeth Mutize

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Rescission and Review Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was entitled to rescission of the default judgment dismissing its review application.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant was in wilful default for failing to attend court hearings.
  3. 3 Whether the review application set out sufficient factual grounds to justify setting aside the arbitration award.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant was entitled to rescission of the default judgments because its failure to attend hearings was not wilful and resulted from improper service of notices, which were not sent to its attorneys of record as required by the rules. The applicant acted promptly upon learning of the judgments. However, on reconsideration of the review application, the court held that the applicant failed to set out sufficient factual grounds for review in its founding affidavit. The grounds advanced were vague, general, and unsupported by concrete facts, and no supplementary affidavit was filed to cure these defects. The court reaffirmed that review applications must be based on...

Court Disposition

Rescission of default judgments granted; review application dismissed; arbitration award made order of court; costs awarded to third respondent for opposing the review application only.

Orders

  • The default judgment of 16 April 2013 dismissing the rescission application is rescinded.
  • The judgment of 9 May 2012 dismissing the review application and making the arbitration award an order of court is rescinded.