Ralo v Transnet Port Terminals and Others [2015] ZAECPEHC 68 (17 June 2015)

Ralo v Transnet Port Terminals and Others [2015] ZAECPEHC 68 (17 June 2015)

The court held that the consolidated practice manual is binding and its provisions are not merely guidelines. The applicant failed to file the record within the prescribed 60-day period and did not seek or obtain an extension. In terms of the practice manual, the application is deemed withdrawn. The court found no merit in the applicant's argument that the manual is not binding or that the delay was insubstantial. The proper order in such circumstances is to strike the review application from the roll, without prejudice to the applicant's right to seek reinstatement and condonation in a separate application. The court declined to award costs against the applicant, as the failure was...

Citation
[2015] ZAECPEHC 68
Parties
Applicant: Melikaya Lulumile Ralo; Respondent: Transnet Port Terminals; Respondent: Transnet Bargaining Council; Respondent: Leanne Scheepers Ah Shene N.O.
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 June 2015
Case Number
P136/2014
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application to Review and Set Aside Arbitration Award; Preliminary Points Argued and Decided
Outcome
Review application struck from the roll; no order as to costs.
Judges
Van Niekerk
Legal Topics
Practice Manual Compliance, Condonation, Late Filing of Record, Withdrawal of Application
Labour Law Civil Procedure Practice Manual Compliance Condonation Late Filing of Record Withdrawal of Application

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Melikaya Lulumile Ralo

Applicant

Transnet Port Terminals

Respondent

Transnet Bargaining Council

Respondent

Leanne Scheepers Ah Shene N.O.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application to Review and Set Aside Arbitration Award; Preliminary Points Argued and Decided

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's failure to file the record within the prescribed period results in the application being deemed withdrawn.
  2. 2 Whether the practice manual is binding and has conclusive effect regarding withdrawal of applications.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is entitled to condonation for late filing and reinstatement of the review application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the consolidated practice manual is binding and its provisions are not merely guidelines. The applicant failed to file the record within the prescribed 60-day period and did not seek or obtain an extension. In terms of the practice manual, the application is deemed withdrawn. The court found no merit in the applicant's argument that the manual is not binding or that the delay was insubstantial. The proper order in such circumstances is to strike the review application from the roll, without prejudice to the applicant's right to seek reinstatement and condonation in a separate application. The court declined to award costs against the applicant, as the failure was...

Court Disposition

Review application struck from the roll; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The review application is struck from the roll.
  • No order as to costs.