About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: Johannesburg Labour Court, Johannesburg
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: Johannesburg Labour Court, Johannesburg
>>
2006
>>
[2006] ZALCJHB 28
|
|
Sibamba v Commission for Conciliation Mediation And Arbitration and Others (JR231/06) [2006] ZALCJHB 28 (17 November 2006)
IN
THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
HELD
AT JOHANNESBURG
CASE
NO: JR231/06
In
the matter between:
MANDLA
E
SIBAMBA
Applicant
and
COMMISSION
FOR CONCIILATION,
MEDIATION
AND
ARBITRATION
First
respondent
K
MAMBA NO
Second
respondent
SOUTH
AFRICAN POLICE SERVICES
Third
respondent
JUDGMENT
LEEUW
AJ
INTRODUCTION
[1]
The applicant seeks an order reviewing and setting aside the ruling
of the second respondent (“the arbitrator”)
wherein he
refused to grant condonation for the late referral of the dispute to
the first respondent (“the CCMA”).
The application is
opposed by the third respondent.
[2]
The applicant had approached the CCMA in terms of section 191 (2) of
the Labour Relations Act No 66 of 1995 (“the LRA”)
seeking condonation for the late referral of his dispute on the 29
June 2005, having been dismissed from employment on 30 September
1997
by the third respondent. The referral was three years out of time.
REASONS
FOR THE REFUSAL OF THE CONDONATION
[3]
The arbitrator refused the condonation application on the basis that
the applicant had not established any reasonable prospects
of success
and further that he had not given good cause or reasonable
explanation for his failure to refer the dispute timeously
and in
accordance with the Rules of the CCMA. He further held that “it
is trite law that civil claims prescribe after three
years”.
ARE
THERE ANY GROUNDS FOR INTERFERING WITH THE RULING?
[4]
Although there is no transcribed record of the CCMA, it appears from
the pleadings filed at the CCMA for the purpose of the
condonation
application, that the applicant first referred the dispute to the
Safety & Security Sectoral Bargaining Council
(SSSBC) on the 23
March 2005, and was informed that the forum had no jurisdiction to
conciliate and/or arbitrate over his dispute.
He then referred the
dispute to the CCMA on 29 June 2005.
[5]
Applicant does not explain the reason for the delay from the time of
his dismissal on 30 September 1997 up to the 23 March 2005,
save to
state that he was sent from pillar to post by the third respondent’s
employees.
[6]
The arbitrator did not deal with the merits of the case as it would
appear there were none presented before him.
[7]
I am of the view that the arbitrator did not misdirect himself in
dismissing the application for condonation and have no reason
to
interfere therewith.
[8]
The application is accordingly dismissed. Each party is ordered to
pay its own costs.
_________________
M
M LEEUW
Acting
Judge of the Labour Court
APPEARANCES
For
the applicant: Mandla
E Sibamba
(in
person)
For
the respondent: Adv M B
Matlejoane
(instructed
by The office of the State
Attorney
- Pretoria)
Date
of hearing: 24
October 2006
Date
of judgment: 17
November 2006