Technikon Free State v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (J1946/99) [2002] ZALC 107 (17 January 2002)

Technikon Free State v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (J1946/99) [2002] ZALC 107 (17 January 2002)

The court found that the applicant had indeed opposed the condonation application and that the second respondent failed to consider the opposition or provide reasons for his decision. The absence of notification to the applicant and lack of inquiry into its absence at the hearing constituted procedural irregularities. The commissioner did not apply his mind to the facts before him, rendering the condonation ruling reviewable. Furthermore, the third respondent's prospects of success in a renewed condonation application were remote, given the nature of the misconduct and the lack of a satisfactory explanation for the delay. The court substituted the commissioner's ruling with an order...

Citation
[2002] ZALC 107
Parties
Applicant: Technikon Free State; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Botha C, NO; Respondent: Prof J.M.B. Hadebe
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 January 2002
Case Number
J1946/99
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Leave to Appeal Granted After Review of Condonation Ruling
Outcome
Condonation ruling by the second respondent set aside and substituted with an order refusing condonation; leave to appeal granted.
Judges
E Revelas
Legal Topics
Condonation Application, Review of Commissioner Decision, Disciplinary Procedure, Prospects of Success
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Application Review of Commissioner Decision Disciplinary Procedure 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

Technikon Free State

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Botha C, NO

Respondent

Prof J.M.B. Hadebe

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Leave to Appeal Granted After Review of Condonation Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was denied a fair opportunity to oppose the condonation application before the CCMA.
  2. 2 Whether the second respondent properly considered the applicant's opposition to condonation.
  3. 3 Whether the condonation ruling by the second respondent was reviewable.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had indeed opposed the condonation application and that the second respondent failed to consider the opposition or provide reasons for his decision. The absence of notification to the applicant and lack of inquiry into its absence at the hearing constituted procedural irregularities. The commissioner did not apply his mind to the facts before him, rendering the condonation ruling reviewable. Furthermore, the third respondent's prospects of success in a renewed condonation application were remote, given the nature of the misconduct and the lack of a satisfactory explanation for the delay. The court substituted the commissioner's ruling with an order...

Court Disposition

Condonation ruling by the second respondent set aside and substituted with an order refusing condonation; leave to appeal granted.

Orders

  • The ruling granting condonation is set aside.
  • Condonation is refused.