Ramabolu v South African Post Office Ltd and Others (JR 2229/11) [2013] ZALCJHB 271 (15 October 2013)

Ramabolu v South African Post Office Ltd and Others (JR 2229/11) [2013] ZALCJHB 271 (15 October 2013)

The Labour Court found that the third respondent's ruling to set the matter down for a hearing de novo, requiring all viva voce evidence to be re-presented, was not justified in light of the parties' agreement on the evidence to be relied upon. The court held that the commissioner should have respected the parties' agreement unless there were compelling reasons to do otherwise. The ruling was therefore reviewed and set aside. The matter was remitted for a fresh hearing before a different commissioner, with the evidence to consist of the records of the previous hearings unless the parties agree otherwise in writing. The first respondent's late filing of its answering affidavit was...

Citation
[2013] ZALCJHB 271
Parties
Applicant: Ramabolu, Molupe James; Respondent: South African Post Office Limited; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Commissioner C Dell (NO)
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 October 2013
Case Number
JR 2229/11
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application to Set Aside Interlocutory Ruling
Outcome
The third respondent's ruling is reviewed and set aside. The matter is remitted for a fresh hearing before a different commissioner, with specified evidence. Costs awarded to the applicant.
Judges
R Lagrange
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Review of Arbitration Award, Condonation of Late Filing, Remittal for Fresh Hearing
Labour Law Unfair Dismissal Review of Arbitration Award Condonation of Late Filing Remittal for Fresh Hearing

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ramabolu, Molupe James

Applicant

South African Post Office Limited

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Commissioner C Dell (NO)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application to Set Aside Interlocutory Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the third respondent's ruling to set the unfair dismissal case for a hearing de novo was reviewable.
  2. 2 Whether the late filing of affidavits by the parties should be condoned or struck out.
  3. 3 What evidence should be considered at the remitted hearing.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Court found that the third respondent's ruling to set the matter down for a hearing de novo, requiring all viva voce evidence to be re-presented, was not justified in light of the parties' agreement on the evidence to be relied upon. The court held that the commissioner should have respected the parties' agreement unless there were compelling reasons to do otherwise. The ruling was therefore reviewed and set aside. The matter was remitted for a fresh hearing before a different commissioner, with the evidence to consist of the records of the previous hearings unless the parties agree otherwise in writing. The first respondent's late filing of its answering affidavit was...

Court Disposition

The third respondent's ruling is reviewed and set aside. The matter is remitted for a fresh hearing before a different commissioner, with specified evidence. Costs awarded to the applicant.

Orders

  • The first respondent’s late filing of its answering affidavit is condoned.
  • The applicant’s late filing of its replying affidavit is struck out.