Zwane and Others v Brakpan Primary School (Application for Leave to Appeal) (JS1013/20) [2024] ZALCJHB 318 (20 August 2024)
The applicants failed to provide a reasonable and comprehensive explanation for the two-year delay in filing their application for leave to appeal. The explanation offered did not account for significant periods of inactivity. In accordance with established legal principles, the absence of a reasonable explanation...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] ZALCJHB 318
- Parties
- Applicant: Zandile Zwane & 4 Others; Respondent: Brakpan Primary School
- Court
- Labour Court Johannesburg
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Case Number
- JS1013/20
- Procedural Posture
- Leave to Appeal / Application for Condonation and Leave to Appeal
- Outcome
- Condonation for the late filing of the application for leave to appeal is refused. The application for leave to appeal is not considered.
- Judges
- M Van As
- Legal Topics
- Condonation, Leave to Appeal, Late Filing, Prospects of Success
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Zandile Zwane & 4 Others
Applicant
Brakpan Primary School
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Condonation and Leave to Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether condonation should be granted for the late filing of the application for leave to appeal.
- 2 Whether the applicants provided a reasonable explanation for the lengthy delay in filing the application.
- 3 Whether the court should consider the prospects of success in the absence of a reasonable explanation for the delay.
Ratio Decidendi
The applicants failed to provide a reasonable and comprehensive explanation for the two-year delay in filing their application for leave to appeal. The explanation offered did not account for significant periods of inactivity. In accordance with established legal principles, the absence of a reasonable explanation for a lengthy delay precludes the court from considering the prospects of success. Consequently, condonation for the late filing was refused, and the application for leave to appeal was not considered.
Court Disposition
Condonation for the late filing of the application for leave to appeal is refused. The application for leave to appeal is not considered.
Orders
- The application for condonation for the late filing of the application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
- There is no order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
37 paragraphs
THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG
Not Reportable
Case no: JS 1013/20
In the matter between:
ZANDILE ZWANE & 4 OTHERS Applicants and BRAKPAN PRIMARY SCHOOL Respondent
Decided: In Chambers
Delivered: 20 August 2024
This judgment was handed down electronically by circulation to the parties' representatives by email. The date for hand-down is deemed
to be on 20 August 2024
JUDGMENT: APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL
VAN AS, AJ
Introduction
1. The applicants seek leave to appeal against the judgment which I delivered on 2 March 2021 (“the Judgment”).
2. The applicants also seek condonation for the late filing of their application for leave to appeal.
3. These two applications are both unopposed.
THE CONDONATION APPLICATION
4. The Judgment was delivered on 2 March 2021.
5. The application for leave to appeal was filed on 4 April 2023.
6. Rule 30(2) of the Old Labour Court Rules (which were applicable) required an application for leave to appeal to be served and filed within fifteen court days of the Judgment (i.e. on in before 23 March 2021).
7. There is therefore a delay of some two years which is clearly excessive.
8. The explanation for the delay is a litany of reasons ranging from a lack of funds to being advised by the Legal Aid Board that the application for leave to appeal is without merit.
9. What is however clear from the founding affidavit in support of the condonation application is that there is simply no explanation for large periods of the delay, including the period from 14 December 2021 (when their attorney of record addressed a letter to the applicants advising them of their prospects of success on appeal) to September 2022 (when the third applicant consulted with the applicants’ attorney of record).
10. A party seeking condonation is required to furnish an explanation which must offer an explanation for the full length of the delay.[1]
11. This is particularly so where there has been a lengthy delay.[2]
12. It is also settled law that this court need not even consider the prospects of success where there is no reasonable explanation for a lengthy delay.[3]
13. I am not satisfied that the applicants have satisfied an essential requirement for condonation, namely a reasonable explanation for a lengthy delay.
14. I therefore refuse to condone the late filing of the application for leave to appeal.
15. In light of the fact that condonation has been refused, there is no need for me to consider the application for leave to appeal.
16. In the premises, the following order is made:
ORDER
17. The application for condonation for the late filing of the application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
18. There is no order as to costs.
Michael Van As
Acting Judge of the Labour Court of South Africa
[1] See Independent Municipal and Allied Trade Union obo Zungu v SA Local Government Bargaining Council and others (2010) 31 ILJ 1413 (LC)
[2] See eThekwini Municipality v Ingonyama Trust 2013 (5) BCLR 497 (CC)
[3] National Union of Mineworkers v Council for Mineral Technology [1999] 3 BLLR 209 (LAC)