Tau v Commission For Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR 2348/06) [2014] ZALCJHB 229 (1 July 2014)

Tau v Commission For Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR 2348/06) [2014] ZALCJHB 229 (1 July 2014)

The court found that the applicant's delay in filing the review application was excessive and only partially explained. The period between February and June 2007 was not explained at all, and the applicant's reliance on the variation of the case number was misplaced, as he could have proceeded with the review and amended the citation later. The applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay, which alone justified dismissal of the condonation application. Furthermore, the applicant did not demonstrate reasonable prospects of success in the review, as the arbitrator's findings were supported by the evidence and not shown to be unreasonable. The applicant had already...

Citation
[2014] ZALCJHB 229
Parties
Applicant: Monami Ben Tau; Respondent: Commission For Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Commissioner K D Matji (N.O); Respondent: Telkom SA Ltd
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 July 2014
Case Number
JR 2348/06
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Condonation Application for Late Filing of Review
Outcome
Application for condonation of late filing of review application dismissed with costs.
Judges
R Lagrange
Legal Topics
Condonation for Late Filing, Review of Arbitration Award, Misconduct, Procedural Fairness, Prospects of Success
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation for Late Filing Review of Arbitration Award Misconduct Procedural Fairness 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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Monami Ben Tau

Applicant

Commission For Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Commissioner K D Matji (N.O)

Respondent

Telkom SA Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Condonation Application for Late Filing of Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's delay of 122 days in filing the review application should be condoned.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant has reasonable prospects of success in the review application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's delay in filing the review application was excessive and only partially explained. The period between February and June 2007 was not explained at all, and the applicant's reliance on the variation of the case number was misplaced, as he could have proceeded with the review and amended the citation later. The applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay, which alone justified dismissal of the condonation application. Furthermore, the applicant did not demonstrate reasonable prospects of success in the review, as the arbitrator's findings were supported by the evidence and not shown to be unreasonable. The applicant had already...

Court Disposition

Application for condonation of late filing of review application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for condonation of the late filing of the applicant's review application is dismissed with costs.