SOS Protec Sure v PSTWU obo Mabea and Others (JR2826/2019) [2021] ZALCJHB 257 (30 August 2021)

SOS Protec Sure v PSTWU obo Mabea and Others (JR2826/2019) [2021] ZALCJHB 257 (30 August 2021)

The Commissioner failed to consider the evidence regarding the correct email addresses for service of the notice of set-down. The applicant was not properly notified of the arbitration hearing, and the default award was erroneously made in its absence. In such circumstances, the applicant was not required to show good cause for rescission. The rescission ruling is therefore reviewed and set aside, and rescission is granted. The conduct of the union in opposing the application without substantive grounds and using incorrect email addresses warrants a cost order against it.

Citation
[2021] ZALCJHB 257
Parties
Applicant: SOS Protec Sure; Respondent: PSTWU obo Dancan Mabea and 160 Others; Respondent: The Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: N Kheswa N O
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 August 2021
Case Number
JR2826/2019
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application to review and set aside the rescission ruling is granted.
Judges
F Coetzee
Legal Topics
Rescission of Award, Service of Process, Default Judgment, Costs Award
Labour Law Civil Procedure Rescission of Award Service of Process Default Judgment Costs 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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SOS Protec Sure

Applicant

PSTWU obo Dancan Mabea and 160 Others

Respondent

The Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

N Kheswa N O

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Commissioner erred in refusing to rescind the default award.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant was properly notified of the arbitration hearing.
  3. 3 Whether the award was erroneously made in the absence of the applicant.

Ratio Decidendi

The Commissioner failed to consider the evidence regarding the correct email addresses for service of the notice of set-down. The applicant was not properly notified of the arbitration hearing, and the default award was erroneously made in its absence. In such circumstances, the applicant was not required to show good cause for rescission. The rescission ruling is therefore reviewed and set aside, and rescission is granted. The conduct of the union in opposing the application without substantive grounds and using incorrect email addresses warrants a cost order against it.

Court Disposition

Application to review and set aside the rescission ruling is granted.

Orders

  • The rescission ruling dated 24 October 2019 under case number GAJB28832-18 is reviewed and set aside.
  • The first respondent is ordered to pay the applicant's costs.