Ramabulana v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1190/16) [2017] ZALCJHB 500 (16 October 2017)

Ramabulana v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1190/16) [2017] ZALCJHB 500 (16 October 2017)

The court held that the extension of time for filing the review record was a judicial function, not an administrative action. The judge emphasized that the ruling was made in chambers pursuant to Clause 11.2.3 of the Practice Manual, which does not require the provision of reasons for such rulings. The request for reasons by the third respondent's legal representative was deemed inappropriate and contemptuous, as it mischaracterized the nature of the judicial act. The judge directed that the conduct of the legal practitioner be referred to the relevant law society for investigation.

Citation
[2017] ZALCJHB 500
Parties
Applicant: Avhapfani Oslet Ramabulana; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Lawrence Nowesenetz N.O.; Respondent: University of South Africa
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
16 October 2017
Case Number
JR1190/16
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application for Extension of Time to File Review Record
Outcome
Application for extension of time granted; request for reasons refused; conduct of third respondent's legal representative referred to law society.
Judges
Moshoana
Legal Topics
Review Proceedings, Extension of Time, Practice Manual Interpretation
Labour Law Civil Procedure Review Proceedings Extension of Time Practice Manual Interpretation

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Avhapfani Oslet Ramabulana

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Lawrence Nowesenetz N.O.

Respondent

University of South Africa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application for Extension of Time to File Review Record

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judicial ruling extending the time period for filing the review record constitutes administrative action.
  2. 2 Whether reasons must be provided for a judicial ruling made in chambers under Clause 11.2.3 of the Practice Manual.
  3. 3 Whether the conduct of the third respondent's legal representative in requesting reasons is contemptuous.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the extension of time for filing the review record was a judicial function, not an administrative action. The judge emphasized that the ruling was made in chambers pursuant to Clause 11.2.3 of the Practice Manual, which does not require the provision of reasons for such rulings. The request for reasons by the third respondent's legal representative was deemed inappropriate and contemptuous, as it mischaracterized the nature of the judicial act. The judge directed that the conduct of the legal practitioner be referred to the relevant law society for investigation.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time granted; request for reasons refused; conduct of third respondent's legal representative referred to law society.

Orders

  • No reasons are to be provided for the ruling.
  • The Registrar is directed to place these reasons with the relevant Law Society for investigation.