Viola v V and A Water Front Holdings (Pty) Ltd (C249/19) [2019] ZALCCT 12 (7 May 2019)

Viola v V and A Water Front Holdings (Pty) Ltd (C249/19) [2019] ZALCCT 12 (7 May 2019)

The court found that the applicant did not act expeditiously in bringing the application and that any urgency was self-created. The applicant failed to provide a full and candid explanation regarding her knowledge of the disciplinary findings and did not explain what steps, if any, she took to obtain the outcome of the hearing. Given the delay and lack of urgency, the court declined to condone non-compliance with the timeframes and refused to treat the matter as urgent. The application was struck off the roll with costs, and the merits of the dispute were not considered.

Citation
[2019] ZALCCT 12
Parties
Applicant: Wendy Jane Viola; Respondent: V and A Water Front Holdings (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 May 2019
Case Number
C249/19
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Urgent Relief Struck From the Roll
Outcome
Application struck off the roll with costs.
Judges
Rabkin-Naicker
Legal Topics
Urgency in Labour Court, Self Created Urgency, Disciplinary Proceedings, Condonation of Timeframes
Labour Law Civil Procedure Urgency in Labour Court Self Created Urgency Disciplinary Proceedings Condonation of Timeframes

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wendy Jane Viola

Applicant

V and A Water Front Holdings (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Urgent Relief Struck From the Roll

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application should be treated as urgent and condonation granted for non-compliance with timeframes.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's resignation was valid and effective on 28 February 2019.
  3. 3 Whether the disciplinary hearing and its findings are null and void and should be set aside.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant did not act expeditiously in bringing the application and that any urgency was self-created. The applicant failed to provide a full and candid explanation regarding her knowledge of the disciplinary findings and did not explain what steps, if any, she took to obtain the outcome of the hearing. Given the delay and lack of urgency, the court declined to condone non-compliance with the timeframes and refused to treat the matter as urgent. The application was struck off the roll with costs, and the merits of the dispute were not considered.

Court Disposition

Application struck off the roll with costs.

Orders

  • The application is struck off the roll with costs.