About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: Johannesburg Labour Court, Johannesburg
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: Johannesburg Labour Court, Johannesburg
>>
2017
>>
[2017] ZALCJHB 86
|
|
Luvuyo v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR732/13) [2017] ZALCJHB 86 (28 February 2017)
REPUBLIC
OF SOUTH AFRICA
THE
LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG
JUDGMENT
Not
Reportable
Case
No:
JR732/13
In
the matter between:
MANGOCOBONGA
LUVUYO
Applicant
and
COMMISSION FOR
CONCILIATION MEDIATION AND
ARBITRATION
COMMISSIONER
ELIZABETH LERUMO
KLOOF
GOLD FIELD
1
st
Respondent
2
nd
Respondent
3
rd
Respondent
HEARD:
In chambers
DELIVERED:
28 FEBRUARY 2017
LEAVE
TO APPEAL - JUDGMENT
MOLAHLEHI
J
Introduction
[1]
This
is the application for leave to appeal the judgment of this court
made on 26 May 2016 in terms of which the applicant’s
review
application was dismissed. The applicant’s review application
concerned the ruling by the CCMA Commissioner under
case GAIT 3743
dated the 12 May 2007.
[2]
In
terms of the finding which was the subject of the review application,
the Commissioner had refused condonation for the late referral
of the
alleged unfair dismissal dispute to the CCMA.
[3]
The
application for leave to appeal is accompanied by the application for
the late filling of the leave to appeal.
[4]
It
would appear that the applicant received the judgment dismissing his
review application on the 22 June 2016. He then approached
the Legal
Aid Board South Africa for assistance. He blames the Legal Aid Board
South Africa for the delay in filling the leave
to appeal.
[5]
It
is apparent that the applicant, who is a lay person, drafted the
application himself. I will for this reason accept his explanation
as
being reasonable, and thus condone the late filling of the leave to
appeal.
[6]
Turning
to the merits of the leave to appeal, it is trite that the test to
apply in determining an application of this nature is
that of
determining whether there are reasonable prospects that another
court, faced with the same facts as those that serve before
this
court, is likely to arrive at a different conclusion.
[7]
Having
read the applicant’s application and the judgment of this court
made on the 26 May 2016, I am of the opinion that the
applicant has
failed to make out a case for leave to appeal. In other words I am
not persuaded that there is a reasonable possibility
that the Labour
Appeal Court is likely to arrive at a different conclusion to that
reached by this court if leave to appeal was
granted.
Order
[8]
Accordingly
the applicant’s application for leave to appeal the judgment of
this court is dismissed with no order as to cost
_________________
E.M MOLAHLEHI
JUDGE
OF THE LABOUR COURT
Appearances:
In chambers