Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Unilever Field Services v Shibambu and Others (JR22/2013) [2025] ZALCJHB 44 (12 February 2025)
The Labour Court held that the review application had been archived and deemed withdrawn under the Practice Manual, leaving no jurisdiction to hear it.
Pillay v Ethekwini Municipality: Communications Department and Others (D 96/22) [2025] ZALCD 1 (20 January 2025)
The applicant failed to comply with the Practice Manual requirements by not filing the written notice to the registrar within 12 months of launching the review application and allowing the matter to remain stagnant for more than 6 months. The Practice Manual is clear that such non-compliance results in the application being archived and regarded as lapsed. The Labour Appeal Court has confirmed that, in these circumstances, the court lacks jurisdiction and must strike the matter from the roll. The applicant was warned of the lapse but persisted without seeking reinstatement. Accordingly, the r…
Source excerpt
Department of Transport v General Public Service Sector Bargaining Council and Others (PR 02/21) [2023] ZALCPE 7 (2 May 2023)
The court found that the applicant failed to prosecute the review application with the required diligence and urgency, as mandated by the Labour Relations Act and the Practice Manual. The delay in filing the necessary papers was material, and the explanation tendered for significant periods of inactivity was inadequate and unsatisfactory. The court held that the archiving of the file was automatic upon expiry of the prescribed timeframes, and the applicant bore the onus to show good cause for retrieval. The applicant did not provide a full explanation for the delay, particularly for the perio…
Source excerpt
Stephens v South African Local Government Bargaining Council and Others (PR 169/20) [2023] ZALCPE 8 (26 April 2023)
The Labour Court held that a review application was deemed withdrawn for late filing of the record, and condonation could not be granted without reinstatement.
JB Marks Local Municipality v SALGBC and Others (JR543/2018) [2021] ZALCJHB 252 (25 August 2021)
The Court found that the applicant failed to comply with the mandatory time periods set out in the Practice Manual, specifically by not delivering the record within 60 days and not prosecuting the review application within six months. The Practice Manual is binding and its provisions are not merely guidelines. The delivery of the record outside the prescribed period does not constitute a valid step to prevent archiving or dismissal. There is no requirement for the respondent to apply for archiving; the Registrar is obliged to archive the file upon non-compliance. As a result, the review appli…
Source excerpt
Hlabiwa v CCMA and Others (JR213/05) [2014] ZALCJHB 383 (2 October 2014)
The Labour Court refused to let the applicant retrieve an archived review file, finding the review was late without condonation and had not been diligently prosecuted.
Explore more
