Department of Health and Social Development v Sambo NO and Others (JR958/2014) [2016] ZALCJHB 529 (7 September 2016)

Department of Health and Social Development v Sambo NO and Others (JR958/2014) [2016] ZALCJHB 529 (7 September 2016)

The court found the delay in filing the review application to be significant and the explanation for the delay wholly unsatisfactory. The applicant and its representatives failed to act with the required urgency and disregarded statutory time limits. The court held that the applicant's conduct was in breach of the practice manual and established principles governing condonation. As the explanation for the delay was inadequate, the court declined to consider the prospects of success in the review application. The court exercised its discretion to award costs against the applicant, finding it unfair for the third respondent to bear the costs of opposing the applications.

Citation
[2016] ZALCJHB 529
Parties
Applicant: Dept of Health & Social Development; Respondent: Martin Sambo N.O; Respondent: Public Health and Social Development Sectoral Bargaining Council; Respondent: Dinkwetse Julliet Motsomi
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 September 2016
Case Number
JR958/2014
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application for Condonation for Late Filing of Review; Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
Condonation for the late filing of the review application is refused. The review application is dismissed with costs.
Judges
Van Niekerk
Legal Topics
Condonation, Review of Arbitration Award, Practice Manual Compliance, Late Filing, Costs Award
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Review of Arbitration Award Practice Manual Compliance Late Filing Costs Award

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dept of Health & Social Development

Applicant

Martin Sambo N.O

Respondent

Public Health and Social Development Sectoral Bargaining Council

Respondent

Dinkwetse Julliet Motsomi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application for Condonation for Late Filing of Review; Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether condonation should be granted for the late filing of the review application.
  2. 2 Whether the review application should be entertained despite non-compliance with statutory time limits.
  3. 3 Whether costs should be awarded against the applicant.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the delay in filing the review application to be significant and the explanation for the delay wholly unsatisfactory. The applicant and its representatives failed to act with the required urgency and disregarded statutory time limits. The court held that the applicant's conduct was in breach of the practice manual and established principles governing condonation. As the explanation for the delay was inadequate, the court declined to consider the prospects of success in the review application. The court exercised its discretion to award costs against the applicant, finding it unfair for the third respondent to bear the costs of opposing the applications.

Court Disposition

Condonation for the late filing of the review application is refused. The review application is dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Condonation for the late filing of the review application is refused.
  • The review application is dismissed, with costs.