Roberts and Others v South African Local Government Bargaining Council and Others (JR 1559/2022) [2023] ZALCJHB 292 (20 October 2023)

Roberts and Others v South African Local Government Bargaining Council and Others (JR 1559/2022) [2023] ZALCJHB 292 (20 October 2023)

The court found that the delay in filing the review application was inordinate and not satisfactorily explained. The applicants' explanation was vague and lacked particularity for the entire period of delay. No evidence of prospects of success was provided, and the founding affidavit did not address the applicable test for reviewing a jurisdictional ruling. The applicants confused the relief sought, attempting to obtain substantive relief not available in a review of a jurisdictional ruling. Granting condonation would frustrate the statutory purpose of expeditious dispute resolution, and after almost two years, the respondents are entitled to finality. The application for condonation was...

Citation
[2023] ZALCJHB 292
Parties
Applicant: Andy Roberts and 53 Others; Respondent: South African Local Government Bargaining Council; Respondent: M.G Rabanyana N.O.; Respondent: Johannesburg City Metro Municipality
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 October 2023
Case Number
JR 1559/2022
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Condonation and Review of Jurisdictional Ruling
Outcome
Condonation for the late filing of the review application is refused. The review application is dismissed.
Judges
Van Niekerk
Legal Topics
Condonation, Jurisdictional Ruling, Unfair Labour Practice, Review Application
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Jurisdictional Ruling Unfair Labour Practice Review 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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andy Roberts and 53 Others

Applicant

South African Local Government Bargaining Council

Respondent

M.G Rabanyana N.O.

Respondent

Johannesburg City Metro Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Condonation and Review of Jurisdictional Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether condonation should be granted for the late filing of the review application.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitrator's jurisdictional ruling should be set aside and substituted.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants have prospects of success in their review application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the delay in filing the review application was inordinate and not satisfactorily explained. The applicants' explanation was vague and lacked particularity for the entire period of delay. No evidence of prospects of success was provided, and the founding affidavit did not address the applicable test for reviewing a jurisdictional ruling. The applicants confused the relief sought, attempting to obtain substantive relief not available in a review of a jurisdictional ruling. Granting condonation would frustrate the statutory purpose of expeditious dispute resolution, and after almost two years, the respondents are entitled to finality. The application for condonation was...

Court Disposition

Condonation for the late filing of the review application is refused. The review application is dismissed.

Orders

  • Condonation for the late filing of the review application is refused.
  • The review application is dismissed.