SATAWU obo Hani v Fidelity Cash Management Services (Pty) Ltd (P 297/11) [2012] ZALCPE 7; (2012) 33 ILJ 2452 (LC) (30 March 2012)

SATAWU obo Hani v Fidelity Cash Management Services (Pty) Ltd (P 297/11) [2012] ZALCPE 7; (2012) 33 ILJ 2452 (LC) (30 March 2012)

The court held that the arbitration award created a new debt, which became due on 2 May 2007 when the right to reinstatement arose. Prescription began to run from that date and was not interrupted by the review proceedings or any other litigation. Section 13(1)(f) of the Prescription Act does not apply to compulsory arbitration under the Labour Relations Act, as it is not an impediment to instituting legal proceedings. The applicant could have filed process to enforce the award at any time after it was issued, and such action would have interrupted prescription. The application to make the award an order of court was brought more than three years after the debt became due, and therefore...

Citation
[2012] ZALCPE 7
Parties
Applicant: SATAWU o.b.o Hani; Respondent: Fidelity Cash Management Services (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 March 2012
Case Number
P 297/11
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application to Make Arbitration Award an Order of Court; Opposed on Prescription Grounds
Outcome
Application dismissed due to prescription of the arbitration award debt.
Judges
Bhoola
Legal Topics
Prescription Act, Arbitration Award Enforcement, Unfair Dismissal, Judgment Debt, Interruption of Prescription
Labour Law Civil Procedure Prescription Act Arbitration Award Enforcement Unfair Dismissal Judgment Debt Interruption of Prescription

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 5 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SATAWU o.b.o Hani

Applicant

Fidelity Cash Management Services (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application to Make Arbitration Award an Order of Court; Opposed on Prescription Grounds

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitration award in favour of Mr Hani had prescribed before the applicant sought to make it an order of court.
  2. 2 Whether the launching of review proceedings or other litigation interrupted the running of prescription under the Prescription Act.
  3. 3 Whether section 13(1)(f) of the Prescription Act applies to compulsory arbitration under the Labour Relations Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the arbitration award created a new debt, which became due on 2 May 2007 when the right to reinstatement arose. Prescription began to run from that date and was not interrupted by the review proceedings or any other litigation. Section 13(1)(f) of the Prescription Act does not apply to compulsory arbitration under the Labour Relations Act, as it is not an impediment to instituting legal proceedings. The applicant could have filed process to enforce the award at any time after it was issued, and such action would have interrupted prescription. The application to make the award an order of court was brought more than three years after the debt became due, and therefore...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed due to prescription of the arbitration award debt.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • Each party is to pay its own costs.