Yellow Jersey Logistics CC v Shezi NO and Others (JR788/13) [2015] ZALCJHB 189 (2 July 2015)

Yellow Jersey Logistics CC v Shezi NO and Others (JR788/13) [2015] ZALCJHB 189 (2 July 2015)

The First and Second Respondents failed to comply with Rule 7A(2)(b) by not filing the electronic record of the arbitration proceedings and did not apply for an extension or oppose the application. The Applicant took reasonable steps to obtain the record and notified the Respondents, who did not respond. The absence of confirmation that the Respondents received notice of set down does not preclude granting the order, as the parties were aware of the review process and the application under Rule 7A(4). In the interests of justice and to avoid further delay, the order compelling the filing of the record was granted. However, a cost order was not appropriate due to lack of clear notice of...

Citation
[2015] ZALCJHB 189
Parties
Applicant: Yellow Jersey Logistics CC; Respondent: Shezi, N N.O.; Respondent: National Bargaining Council for the Road Freight and Logistics Industry; Respondent: Machuseng, Adam
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 July 2015
Case Number
JR788/13
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Order in Terms of Rule 7 A(4) Following Non Compliance by Respondents
Outcome
Order granted compelling the First and Second Respondents to file the electronic record of the arbitration proceedings; no order as to costs.
Judges
Fouche
Legal Topics
Rule 7a Compliance, Default Judgment, Arbitration Record Filing
Labour Law Civil Procedure Rule 7a Compliance Default Judgment Arbitration Record Filing

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

Yellow Jersey Logistics CC

Applicant

Shezi, N N.O.

Respondent

National Bargaining Council for the Road Freight and Logistics Industry

Respondent

Machuseng, Adam

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Order in Terms of Rule 7 A(4) Following Non Compliance by Respondents

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the First and Second Respondents complied with Rule 7A(2)(b) by filing the electronic record of the arbitration proceedings.
  2. 2 Whether the Applicant is entitled to an order compelling the filing of the record under Rule 7A(4).
  3. 3 Whether a cost order should be granted against the First and Second Respondents.

Ratio Decidendi

The First and Second Respondents failed to comply with Rule 7A(2)(b) by not filing the electronic record of the arbitration proceedings and did not apply for an extension or oppose the application. The Applicant took reasonable steps to obtain the record and notified the Respondents, who did not respond. The absence of confirmation that the Respondents received notice of set down does not preclude granting the order, as the parties were aware of the review process and the application under Rule 7A(4). In the interests of justice and to avoid further delay, the order compelling the filing of the record was granted. However, a cost order was not appropriate due to lack of clear notice of...

Court Disposition

Order granted compelling the First and Second Respondents to file the electronic record of the arbitration proceedings; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The First and Second Respondents are compelled to file the electronic recording of the arbitration hearing held on 26 February 2013 with the Registrar of the Labour Court as contemplated by Rule 7A(2)(b).
  • The First and Second Respondents are directed to file such electronic record within 10 days of receipt of this order.