Securicor (Pty) Ltd v Ngwane and Others (D 678/09) [2010] ZALC 310 (25 March 2010)

Securicor (Pty) Ltd v Ngwane and Others (D 678/09) [2010] ZALC 310 (25 March 2010)

The court found that the applicant's explanation for the 13-month delay in filing the review application was wholly inadequate and amounted to no explanation at all. The applicant failed to address or explain the specific periods of delay, particularly the ten weeks between the adjournment of the contempt application and the filing of the review. The court held that in the absence of a reasonable explanation for the delay, it was unnecessary to consider the applicant's prospects of success. The application for condonation was therefore dismissed with costs.

Citation
[2010] ZALC 310
Parties
Applicant: Securicor (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Commissioner J Ngwane; Respondent: CCMA; Respondent: Rajendran Pillay
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 March 2010
Case Number
D 678/09
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Condonation for Late Filing of Review Application
Outcome
Application for condonation dismissed with costs.
Judges
Gush
Legal Topics
Condonation, Review of Arbitration Award, Unfair Dismissal, Delay in Filing, Prospects of Success
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Review of Arbitration Award Unfair Dismissal Delay in Filing Prospects of Success

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Securicor (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Commissioner J Ngwane

Respondent

CCMA

Respondent

Rajendran Pillay

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Condonation for Late Filing of Review Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has provided a reasonable and satisfactory explanation for the 13-month delay in filing the review application.
  2. 2 Whether the absence of a reasonable explanation for the delay precludes consideration of the applicant's prospects of success.
  3. 3 Whether condonation should be granted for the late filing of the review application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's explanation for the 13-month delay in filing the review application was wholly inadequate and amounted to no explanation at all. The applicant failed to address or explain the specific periods of delay, particularly the ten weeks between the adjournment of the contempt application and the filing of the review. The court held that in the absence of a reasonable explanation for the delay, it was unnecessary to consider the applicant's prospects of success. The application for condonation was therefore dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application for condonation dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for condonation is dismissed with costs.