Solidarity obo Van Staaden v Emalahleni Local Municipality (JS291/2020) [2021] ZALCJHB 326 (8 October 2021)
- Citation
- [2021] ZALCJHB 326
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- Labour Court Johannesburg
- Panel
- F. Coetzee
- Case number
- JS291/2020
More details
- Court
- Labour Court Johannesburg
- Panel
- F. Coetzee
- Case number
- JS291/2020
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court found that the respondent's delay of 20 days in filing its statement of defence was long but not excessive. The respondent provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay, primarily due to improper service of the statement of claim and subsequent internal processes. The respondent also presented a defence with prospects of success, arguing that the applicant was not entitled to salary, travel expenses, or leave payment, and had already settled relevant claims. The application for condonation was unopposed, and the court concluded that all relevant considerations justified granting condonation for the late filing of the statement of defence.
Court disposition
Condonation for the late filing of the respondent's statement of defence is granted with no order as to costs.
Orders
- The late filing of the respondent's statement of defence is condoned with no order as to costs.
02
Material facts
Parties
Solidarity obo MC Van Staaden
ApplicantEmalahleni Local Municipality
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Condonation Application / Application for Condonation of Late Filing of Statement of Defence
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the respondent's late filing of its statement of defence should be condoned.
- 02
Whether the delay was excessive and adequately explained.
- 03
Whether the respondent has prospects of success in defending the claim.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The application for condonation was unopposed. The applicant did not file any argument against the respondent's condonation application.
- Respondent
- The respondent explained that it was unaware of the statement of claim due to improper service and only became aware on 1 September 2020. Internal meetings and preparation of affidavits followed, resulting in a 20-day delay. The respondent argued that the applicant has no prospects of success as no salary is due, no entitlement to travel expenses or leave payment exists, and the applicant settled his claim for salary and leave pay.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Labour Court practice
Condonation for late filing may be granted if the delay is adequately explained and prospects of success exist.
- 02
Labour Court practice
Prejudice is not decisive in condonation applications where the delay is not excessive and adequately explained.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court found that the respondent's delay of 20 days in filing its statement of defence was long but not excessive. The respondent provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay, primarily due to improper service of the statement of claim and subsequent internal processes. The respondent also presented a defence with prospects of success, arguing that the applicant was not entitled to salary, travel expenses, or leave payment, and had already settled relevant claims. The application for condonation was unopposed, and the court concluded that all relevant considerations justified granting condonation for the late filing of the statement of defence.
Obiter and limits
- Prejudice does not play a decisive role in this condonation application.
- There is no reason to make a cost order in the circumstances.
Court disposition
Condonation for the late filing of the respondent's statement of defence is granted with no order as to costs.
- The late filing of the respondent's statement of defence is condoned with no order as to costs.
Source and reliance status
Labour Court Johannesburg
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Labour Court Johannesburg
Judgment
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG
Not Reportable
Not of interest to other judges
Case no: JS291-2020
In the matter between:
SOLIDARITY obo MC VAN STAADEN Applicant
and
EMALAHLENI LOCAL MUNICIPALITY Respondent
Heard: 7 October 2021
Delivered: This judgment was handed down electronically by circulation to the parties’ representatives by email and release to SAFLII. The date and time for hand-down is deemed to be 10h00 on 8 October 2021.
Summary: The respondent applied for condonation for the late filing of its statement of defence
JUDGMENT
COETZEE AJ
[1] The parties have agreed for the matter to be decided on paper.
[2] The respondent applied for condonation for the late filing of its statement of defence. The application is unopposed.
[3] The delay is 20 days and is long but not excessive.
[4] The respondent explained the delay in that from 23 June 2020 to 1 September 2020 it was unaware of the issuing of the claim as the statement of claim was not properly served upon the respondent. The respondent only became aware of the statement of claim on 1 September 2020.
[5] From 1 September 2020 to 22 September 2020 the respondent had internal meetings to establish the facts, attended at the Labour Court to inspect the Court file and prepared a draft affidavit opposing the application for default judgment that it received on 1 September 2020.
[6] From 23 September to 5 October 2020 the respondent finalised and settled the opposing affidavit and the statement of defence and served and file same by 6 October 2020.
[7] As to the prospects of success the respondent pleads that the applicant has no prospects. The respondent's version is that no salary is due to the applicant as he failed to report for duty. He has no claim for travelling expenses as he did not qualify in terms of the policy. The applicant also is not entitled to any leave payment as he forfeited his leave in terms of a collective agreement. On top of it all the applicant settled his claim for payment of salary and leave pay.
[8] Prejudice does not play a decisive role.
[9] Having regard to all the considerations, the late filing of the statement of defence is condoned.
Costs
[10] There is no reason to make a cost order.
Order
[11] I make the following order:
1. The late filing of the respondent's statement of defence is condoned with no order as to costs.
F. Coetzee
Acting Judge of the Labour Court of South Africa
Appearances
For the applicant: Decided
on the papers
For the Respondent: Decided on the papers
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.