Unilever Field Services v Shibambu and Others (JR22/2013) [2025] ZALCJHB 44 (12 February 2025)

Unilever Field Services v Shibambu and Others (JR22/2013) [2025] ZALCJHB 44 (12 February 2025)

The Labour Court held that the Practice Manual is binding and applies to review applications filed before its commencement if not finalized. The applicant failed to comply with the Practice Manual and Labour Court Rules by not filing the necessary papers within 12 months of launching the review application. The application was archived and deemed withdrawn, and no good cause was shown for reinstatement. The court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the review application in its current state, and the matter could not proceed due to the incomplete record and procedural lapses. Costs were not awarded as the application was unopposed.

Citation
[2025] ZALCJHB 44
Parties
Applicant: Unilever Field Services (a division of Smollan Group Ltd); Respondent: Mehleketo Confidence Shibambu; Respondent: Wilfred (Noko) Nkgoeng N.O.; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 February 2025
Case Number
JR22/2013
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review Application; Determination of Jurisdiction and Effect of Practice Manual
Outcome
Review application deemed withdrawn; no order as to costs.
Judges
G.C. Phakedi
Legal Topics
Practice Manual Application, Review Application Lapse, Jurisdiction of Labour Court, Archiving of Files
Labour Law Civil Procedure Practice Manual Application Review Application Lapse Jurisdiction of Labour Court Archiving of Files

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Unilever Field Services (a division of Smollan Group Ltd)

Applicant

Mehleketo Confidence Shibambu

Respondent

Wilfred (Noko) Nkgoeng N.O.

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review Application; Determination of Jurisdiction and Effect of Practice Manual

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Labour Court has jurisdiction to entertain the review application given the archiving of the main dispute under the Practice Manual.
  2. 2 Whether the Practice Manual applies to review applications filed before its commencement date.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant complied with the procedural requirements for prosecuting a review application under the Labour Court Rules and Practice Manual.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Court held that the Practice Manual is binding and applies to review applications filed before its commencement if not finalized. The applicant failed to comply with the Practice Manual and Labour Court Rules by not filing the necessary papers within 12 months of launching the review application. The application was archived and deemed withdrawn, and no good cause was shown for reinstatement. The court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the review application in its current state, and the matter could not proceed due to the incomplete record and procedural lapses. Costs were not awarded as the application was unopposed.

Court Disposition

Review application deemed withdrawn; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The review application filed by the applicant is deemed to have been withdrawn.
  • There is no order as to costs.