Samuels v Aspen Pharmacare Ltd (P556/17) [2017] ZALCPE 27 (20 December 2017)

Samuels v Aspen Pharmacare Ltd (P556/17) [2017] ZALCPE 27 (20 December 2017)

The court found that the respondent failed to prosecute its review application within the required 60-day period, resulting in the review being deemed withdrawn in terms of the Labour Court Practice Manual. The respondent did not deliver a notice of opposition or serve its answering affidavit on the applicant, rendering the matter unopposed. The review application did not suspend the operation of the arbitration award as no security was furnished. The applicant was entitled to have the award made an order of court, including reinstatement and payment as specified. Costs were awarded on the ordinary scale as there was no basis for attorney and client costs.

Citation
[2017] ZALCPE 27
Parties
Applicant: Veronique Samuels; Respondent: Aspen Pharmacare Ltd
Court
Labour Court Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 December 2017
Case Number
P556/17
Procedural Posture
Section 158 Application / Unopposed Motion for Award Enforcement
Outcome
Application granted; arbitration award made an order of court; respondent ordered to comply with award, pay interest and costs.
Judges
Potgieter
Legal Topics
Section 158 Enforcement, Arbitration Award, Review Application Lapse, Reinstatement, Interest on Award
Labour Law Section 158 Enforcement Arbitration Award Review Application Lapse Reinstatement Interest on Award

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Veronique Samuels

Applicant

Aspen Pharmacare Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Section 158 Application / Unopposed Motion for Award Enforcement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitration award should be made an order of court.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's review application has lapsed due to non-compliance with the Labour Court Directive.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is entitled to reinstatement and payment as per the award.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent failed to prosecute its review application within the required 60-day period, resulting in the review being deemed withdrawn in terms of the Labour Court Practice Manual. The respondent did not deliver a notice of opposition or serve its answering affidavit on the applicant, rendering the matter unopposed. The review application did not suspend the operation of the arbitration award as no security was furnished. The applicant was entitled to have the award made an order of court, including reinstatement and payment as specified. Costs were awarded on the ordinary scale as there was no basis for attorney and client costs.

Court Disposition

Application granted; arbitration award made an order of court; respondent ordered to comply with award, pay interest and costs.

Orders

  • The arbitration award made by the NBCCI arbitrator on 15 February under case number ECCHEM506-13/14 is made an order of the Court.
  • The respondent must discharge all of its obligations in terms of the arbitration award.