Xaba v Revlon (Pty) Ltd (JR1291/2006) [2008] ZALCJHB 16 (19 March 2008)

Xaba v Revlon (Pty) Ltd (JR1291/2006) [2008] ZALCJHB 16 (19 March 2008)

The court found that the application for leave to appeal was filed 56 days late, well outside the prescribed 15-day period. The only explanation provided was the alleged negligence of the applicant's attorney, but no confirmatory affidavit was submitted to substantiate this claim. The court held that the reason for the delay was not plausible or adequately supported. In considering the prospects of success, the court found that the grounds for appeal revolved around the interpretation of the company rule on money lending, but the applicant had involved supervisors and human resources in her attempt to recover the loan, thereby interfering with the employer's operations. The court...

Citation
[2008] ZALCJHB 16
Parties
Applicant: Elizabeth Xaba; Respondent: Revlon (Pty) Limited
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 March 2008
Case Number
JR1291/2006
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Condonation of Late Filing of Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for condonation of the late filing of leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.
Judges
Cele
Legal Topics
Condonation, Leave to Appeal, Disciplinary Code, Employee Misconduct
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Leave to Appeal Disciplinary Code Employee Misconduct

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Elizabeth Xaba

Applicant

Revlon (Pty) Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Condonation of Late Filing of Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether condonation should be granted for the late filing of the application for leave to appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has shown good cause for the delay in filing the application.
  3. 3 Whether the prospects of success justify granting leave to appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the application for leave to appeal was filed 56 days late, well outside the prescribed 15-day period. The only explanation provided was the alleged negligence of the applicant's attorney, but no confirmatory affidavit was submitted to substantiate this claim. The court held that the reason for the delay was not plausible or adequately supported. In considering the prospects of success, the court found that the grounds for appeal revolved around the interpretation of the company rule on money lending, but the applicant had involved supervisors and human resources in her attempt to recover the loan, thereby interfering with the employer's operations. The court...

Court Disposition

Application for condonation of the late filing of leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for condonation of the late filing of the application for leave to appeal is refused.
  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.