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
Mrwebi v President of Republic of South Africa and Others (JS923/2021) [2024] ZALCJHB 202 (20 May 2024)
The Labour Court dismissed an application to condone the late filing of a Statement of Claim, finding the nearly three-year delay unexplained and jurisdictionally flawed.
Hannival v Yes Clothing CC t/a Ruby Yes (C74/2022) [2023] ZALCCT 69 (13 April 2023)
The Labour Court granted condonation for a late referral of an automatically unfair dismissal claim, finding the applicant and her attorneys acted diligently.
Masinga and Another v Utho Capital (PTY) Ltd (JS120/21) [2022] ZALCJHB 306 (2 November 2022)
The court found that the delay of sixty-five days in filing the statement of case was not unacceptably excessive, particularly in the context of action proceedings. The applicants provided a reasonable and bona fide explanation for the delay, which was largely due to an erroneous referral to the CCMA and incorrect advice regarding the calculation of the ninety-day period. The explanation covered both parts of the delay, including the time taken to seek legal representation after being denied pro bono assistance. The applicants demonstrated at least some prospects of success in the main unfair…
Source excerpt
Chetty v Nissan South Africa Limited (JR914/18) [2022] ZALCJHB 279 (6 October 2022)
The Labour Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal, holding there was no reasonable prospect of success and no basis to revisit its ruling on late CCMA referral.
Nene v Shibo Saravan Bhava Palace (Pty) Ltd t/a KK Logistics (D1420/19) [2021] ZALCD 61 (19 August 2021)
The Labour Court dismissed an application for condonation after finding no adequate explanation for the late referral of an unfair dismissal dispute.
Gordon v Pindulo VDM (Pty) Ltd (JS 1050/19) [2021] ZALCJHB 229 (4 August 2021)
The Labour Court granted condonation for a late statement of case, finding the delay minimal, adequately explained, and in the interests of justice.
Weller v ABSA Bank Limited (JS850/20) [2021] ZALCJHB 207 (2 August 2021)
The court held that section 191(5) of the LRA provides two jurisdictional triggers for referral to the Labour Court: the issue of a certificate of non-resolution or the expiry of 30 days from the date the CCMA received the referral. The applicant was not entitled to wait for the certificate if the 30-day period had already expired. The 90-day period for referral starts running from whichever event occurs first. Since the applicant filed his statement of claim outside the prescribed period, condonation was required. The court found the applicant's explanation for the delay reasonable, consider…
Source excerpt
AMCU obo Busiwe and Another v Rand Uranium (Pty) Ltd (JS298/17) [2021] ZALCJHB 206 (2 August 2021)
The court found that Rand Uranium failed to prove the charges of intimidation, harassment, or continuous undermining of communication structures against the applicant employees. The evidence did not support the allegations, and the applicants' conduct in requesting documents was within their rights under section 204 of the LRA. The retrenchment agreement was not confidential, and the applicants' approach to the HR office was justified given the internal issues within NUM and the impracticality of accessing documents through the prescribed structures. The dismissal was therefore substantively…
Source excerpt
NUFBSAW obo Motaung and Others v Pricewaterhousecoopers (JS2449-18) [2021] ZALCJHB 92 (1 June 2021)
The Labour Court struck the referral from the roll for want of jurisdiction after finding it was filed late and no condonation was sought.
Ngadlela v General Public Service Sector Bargaining Council and Others (C06/2018) [2021] ZALCCT 11 (8 April 2021)
The court found that the Commissioner correctly applied the law in refusing condonation for the late referral of the unfair labour practice dispute. The applicant was aware of the alleged unfair conduct by 16 April 2015 and failed to refer the dispute within the prescribed 90-day period, resulting in an excessive delay of almost two years. The applicant did not provide a reasonable or acceptable explanation for the delay, and the Commissioner was justified in refusing condonation without considering prospects of success. The application for rescission was essentially an appeal of the condonat…
Source excerpt
Explore more
