Utility Economics CC v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR2531/10) [2013] ZALCJHB 103 (21 May 2013)
The employer failed to prosecute its review application for over two years and provided no explanation for the delay. The employee complied with all procedural requirements and suffered prejudice due to the employer's inaction. The court found that the delay was excessive and unjustified, warranting dismissal of the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] ZALCJHB 103
- Parties
- Applicant: Utility Economics CC; Respondent: CCMA; Respondent: Commissioner Thulani Akim; Respondent: Elwen, Sylvia
- Court
- Labour Court Johannesburg
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 21 May 2013
- Case Number
- JR2531/10
- Procedural Posture
- Review Application / Application to Dismiss Review and Make Arbitration Award an Order of Court
- Outcome
- Review application dismissed; arbitration award made an order of court; costs awarded against applicant.
- Judges
- Steenkamp
- Legal Topics
- Review of Arbitration Award, Dismissal for Delay, Costs Award, Ccma Procedure
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Utility Economics CC
Applicant
CCMA
Respondent
Commissioner Thulani Akim
Respondent
Elwen, Sylvia
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application to Dismiss Review and Make Arbitration Award an Order of Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the employer's review application should be dismissed due to excessive delay.
- 2 Whether the arbitration award should be made an order of court.
- 3 Whether the applicant should be ordered to pay costs.
Ratio Decidendi
The employer failed to prosecute its review application for over two years and provided no explanation for the delay. The employee complied with all procedural requirements and suffered prejudice due to the employer's inaction. The court found that the delay was excessive and unjustified, warranting dismissal of the review application. The arbitration award was made an order of court to ensure enforcement. Costs were awarded against the employer because the employee was forced to incur further legal expenses due to the employer's failure to act, contrary to the expeditious and inexpensive nature of CCMA proceedings.
Court Disposition
Review application dismissed; arbitration award made an order of court; costs awarded against applicant.
Orders
- The applicant’s review application is dismissed.
- The award of the second respondent under case number GAJB 11690-10 is made an order of court.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
27 paragraphs
JR2531/10/ev 1 JUDGMENT
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
HELD AT JOHANNESBURG
CASE NO: JR2531/10
DATE: 2013-05-21
In the matter between
UTILITY ECONOMICS CC .................................................................................Applicant
and
CCMA ......................................................................................................First respondent
COMMISSIONER THULANI AKIM .....................................................Second repondent
ELWEN, SYLVIA ...................................................................................Third respondent
_____________________________________________________________
EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT
STEENKAMP, J:
This is a twofold application: firstly, to dismiss an application for review instituted by the employer, Utility Economics CC, in October 2010; and secondly, to make an arbitration award of 8 September 2010 by the second respondent (the commissioner) under the auspices of the first respondent (the CCMA) an order of court.
The arbitration award was handed down on 8 September 2010. The employer (the applicant in the review application), represented by Maharaj attorneys, delivered a review application on 4 October 2010.
The employer delivered the record on 28 February 2011. It filed its notice in terms of Rule 7A(8) more than two years ago, on 10 March 2011. The employee, within the requisite time period, on 24 March 2011, delivered her answering affidavit. For the ensuing two years the employer party has done nothing to pursue the arbitration award. The delay is clearly excessive. The employer has offered no explanation for that delay which has led to clear prejudice to the employee who has been reinstated in terms of the arbitration award.
The employee has fulfilled all of her obligations to pursue the review application. The employer has not done so. In those circumstances there is no doubt in my mind that the review application should be dismissed and that the arbitration award should be made an order of court.
With regard to costs, even though the employer has not opposed this application, it should not have been necessary for the employee over a period of two years to incur further legal costs after she pursued her remedies in the CCMA -- which are supposed to be expeditious and cheap -- because the employer has not fulfilled its obligations. I therefore grant an order in the following terms:
The applicant’s review application is dismissed.
The award of the second respondent under case number GAJB 11690-10 is made an order of court.
The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of this application.
____________________________
STEENKAMP J
APPEARANCES
APPLICANT: Angelo Pantazis
Instructed by Brian Bleazard attorneys.