South African Police Services v Safety and Security Sectoral Bargaining Council and Others (C33/2021) [2025] ZALCCT 53 (11 July 2025)

South African Police Services v Safety and Security Sectoral Bargaining Council and Others (C33/2021) [2025] ZALCCT 53 (11 July 2025)

The applicant failed to comply with the relevant rules and practice manual, resulting in the application being deemed withdrawn. No reasonable or acceptable explanation was provided for the significant delays in filing the record and the reinstatement application. The court found the delay to be flagrant and unjustified, and the absence of explanation was fatal to the application. Even considering the interests of justice and the importance of the matter, the court determined that there were no prospects of success on review. The arbitrator's award of protected promotion was found to be lawful and appropriate under the circumstances, as the evidence established that the unfair labour...

Citation
[2025] ZALCCT 53
Parties
Applicant: South African Police Services; Respondent: Safety and Security Sectoral Bargaining Council; Respondent: Jana Dell; Respondent: JA Kotze; Respondent: Clive Gerald Bowers
Court
Labour Court Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 July 2025
Case Number
C33/2021
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Opposed Reinstatement Application
Outcome
Application for reinstatement dismissed; matter remains deemed withdrawn.
Judges
C May
Legal Topics
Condonation, Unfair Labour Practice, Protected Promotion, Delay in Filing, Prospects of Success
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Unfair Labour Practice Protected Promotion Delay in Filing 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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

South African Police Services

Applicant

Safety and Security Sectoral Bargaining Council

Respondent

Jana Dell

Respondent

JA Kotze

Respondent

Clive Gerald Bowers

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Opposed Reinstatement Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant provided a reasonable explanation for the delay in filing the review application.
  2. 2 Whether the application for reinstatement should be granted in light of the interests of justice and the prospects of success.
  3. 3 Whether the remedy of protected promotion was correctly awarded by the arbitrator.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to comply with the relevant rules and practice manual, resulting in the application being deemed withdrawn. No reasonable or acceptable explanation was provided for the significant delays in filing the record and the reinstatement application. The court found the delay to be flagrant and unjustified, and the absence of explanation was fatal to the application. Even considering the interests of justice and the importance of the matter, the court determined that there were no prospects of success on review. The arbitrator's award of protected promotion was found to be lawful and appropriate under the circumstances, as the evidence established that the unfair labour...

Court Disposition

Application for reinstatement dismissed; matter remains deemed withdrawn.

Orders

  • The application for reinstatement is dismissed.
  • There is no order as to costs.