Portapa t/a Supabets v Moodley NO and Others (JR1027/13) [2016] ZALCJHB 103 (15 March 2016)

THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG

JUDGMENT

Case No: JR 1027/13

DATE: 15 MARCH 2016

In the matter between:

PORTAPA t/a SUPABETS........................................................................................................Applicant

And

COMMISSIONER T MOODLEY N.O......................................................................First Respondent

COMMISSION FOR CONCILIATION,

MEDIATION AND ARBITRATION......................................................................Second Respondent

JUDITH LENGWATI.................................................................................................Third Respondent

Considered: 15 March 2016

Considered in chambers

MOLAHLEHI, J

Introduction

[1] This is an application for leave to appeal against the judgment of this court made on 5 November 2015 in terms of which the applicant was refused condonation for the late filing of its review application and consequently the review application failed.

[2] In refusing to condone the late filing of the applicant’s review application, this court found that the applicant had failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay and in particular because a certain period of the delay was not explained.

[3] The applicant contends that this court erred in refusing to grant it the condonation for the late filing of its review application. It in this respect that it is submitted that there are good prospects that the Labour Appeal Court may reach a different conclusion than the one reached by this Court if leave to appeal was granted.

[4] It is trite that the test to apply when considering an application for leave to appeal is whether there is a reasonable prospect that another court may come to a different conclusion to the one reached by the court a quo.

[5] In the present matter, I have not been persuaded that there is a reasonable prospect that the Labour Appeal Court is likely to arrive at a different conclusion if leave to appeal was to be granted in this matter.

Order

[6] In the premises, the applicant’s application for leave to appeal to the Labour Appeal Court is refused.

Molahlehi, J

Judge of the Labour Court of South Africa