Transnet Limited v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1690/2003) [2007] ZALC 45 (25 June 2007)

Transnet Limited v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1690/2003) [2007] ZALC 45 (25 June 2007)

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate any urgency or genuine intention to prosecute its review application, having done little to advance the matter for over three years. The applicant's reliance on a few letters did not constitute sufficient explanation for the delay. The court held that the mere filing of a review application is not a valid reason to stay the certification of an arbitration award, as this would allow parties to frustrate enforcement simply by instituting review proceedings and then taking no further action. The applicant's conduct was deemed to be a tactic to delay enforcement, and the third respondent had shown considerable patience in waiting to...

Citation
[2007] ZALC 45
Parties
Applicant: Transnet Limited; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Moletsane, Russel N.O; Respondent: Mabentsela, Kalipile
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 June 2007
Case Number
JR1690/2003
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Application for Stay of Certification of Arbitration Award Pending Review
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
Ngalwana
Legal Topics
Stay of Enforcement, Arbitration Award, Review Application, Labour Court Procedure
Labour Law Civil Procedure Stay of Enforcement Arbitration Award Review Application Labour Court Procedure

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Transnet Limited

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Moletsane, Russel N.O

Respondent

Mabentsela, Kalipile

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Stay Application / Application for Stay of Certification of Arbitration Award Pending Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has shown sufficient grounds to justify a stay of certification of the arbitration award pending review.
  2. 2 Whether mere institution of review proceedings is adequate to suspend enforcement of an arbitration award.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's delay and lack of action in pursuing the review application should affect the granting of a stay.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate any urgency or genuine intention to prosecute its review application, having done little to advance the matter for over three years. The applicant's reliance on a few letters did not constitute sufficient explanation for the delay. The court held that the mere filing of a review application is not a valid reason to stay the certification of an arbitration award, as this would allow parties to frustrate enforcement simply by instituting review proceedings and then taking no further action. The applicant's conduct was deemed to be a tactic to delay enforcement, and the third respondent had shown considerable patience in waiting to...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for stay of certification of the arbitration award is dismissed.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of the application.