Unitrans Freight (Pty) Ltd v Bullbring NO and Others (C450/03, 185/04) [2007] ZALC 205 (26 April 2007)

Unitrans Freight (Pty) Ltd v Bullbring NO and Others (C450/03, 185/04) [2007] ZALC 205 (26 April 2007)

The court found that the applicant failed to diligently pursue its review application and did not take reasonable steps to obtain the arbitration record, resulting in an unjustifiable delay of over two years. The absence of the record was directly attributable to the applicant's lack of action, and the court held that the applicant could not benefit from its own failure. The review application was dismissed on the basis of dilatory conduct and absence of the record. The court further held that the arbitration award should be made an order of court under section 158(1)(c) of the LRA, and costs were awarded against the applicant.

Citation
[2007] ZALC 205
Parties
Applicant: Unitrans Freight (Pty) Limited; Respondent: Ursula Bullbring N.O.; Respondent: National Bargaining Council for the Road Freight Industry; Respondent: Society Development Trade Union OBO Kiri Smith
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 April 2007
Case Number
C450/03 & 185/04
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Review application dismissed; arbitration award made order of court; costs awarded against applicant.
Judges
Nel
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Review of Arbitration Award, Delay in Prosecution, Section 158 1 C Application
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Review of Arbitration Award Delay in Prosecution Section 158 1 C Application

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

Unitrans Freight (Pty) Limited

Applicant

Ursula Bullbring N.O.

Respondent

National Bargaining Council for the Road Freight Industry

Respondent

Society Development Trade Union OBO Kiri Smith

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's review application should be dismissed due to failure to prosecute and absence of the arbitration record.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitration award should be made an order of court under section 158(1)(c) of the LRA.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's conduct constituted an abuse of process and unjustifiable delay.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to diligently pursue its review application and did not take reasonable steps to obtain the arbitration record, resulting in an unjustifiable delay of over two years. The absence of the record was directly attributable to the applicant's lack of action, and the court held that the applicant could not benefit from its own failure. The review application was dismissed on the basis of dilatory conduct and absence of the record. The court further held that the arbitration award should be made an order of court under section 158(1)(c) of the LRA, and costs were awarded against the applicant.

Court Disposition

Review application dismissed; arbitration award made order of court; costs awarded against applicant.

Orders

  • The application to review is dismissed.
  • The award of 29 July 2003 made under case number D110/WC/03 TOKISO REF NO: Tokiso/03/477 under the auspices of the second respondent is made an order of court.