UDdDIE
<f
oY Wi SO
OWN 2 AS
er
COR Sau
THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, CAPE TOWN
Not Reportable
Case No: C 747/2021
In the matter between:
HILTON LIKGALE Applicant
and
STATUTORY COUNCIL FOR THE
PRINTING INDUSTRY First Respondent
COMMISSIONER LILLIAN GORDEMA N.O. Second Respondent
ROTALABEL®A DIVISION.OF BIDVEST (PTY) LTD Third Respondent
Heard: 27 June 2025
Delivered: (4. July 2025
JUDGMENT
VENTER AJ
2
Introduction
[1] The Applicant in this matter requests an order to reinstate or revive the main
review application, which is considered withdrawn, lapsed, and archived under
the then Practice Manual of this Court (clauses 11 and 16 of the Practice
Manual).
[2] The application is not opposed, although the Third Respondent, was
represented in court by Adv Bernstein, who confirmed that the application Was
not opposed.
Background
[3] The Applicant was initially represented by a labourjconsultant, Mr. Ronald
Simons, but he gained employment elsewhere during August 2022. The
Applicant was then without representation until thesappointment of his current
attorneys on 6 February 2023.
[4] The arbitration award that forms,the basis of the main application was issued
on 21 November 2021, and the application for review was served and filed on
17 December 2021.
[5] The Applicant received a notice in terms of Rule 7A(5) on 3 March 2022, which
indicated that there were no CDs or documents available. He was
subsequently informed by the Registrar, on 7 April 2023, that the record was
received, albeit without the award and written reasons.
[6] The Applicant avers that he was unable to comply with Rule 7A due to the
aforementioned issue.
[7] The current application for reinstatement of the review was filed on 24 October
2023. To revive the review, the Applicant had to submit an application for its
reinstatement
Practice Manual
[8] The critical clauses in the then-applicable Practice Manual were:
3
Clause 11.2.2
For the purposes of Rule 7A (6), records must be filed within 60 days of the
date on which the applicant is advised by the Registrar that the record has been
received.
Clause 11.2.3
If the applicant fails to file a record within the prescribed periodgthe Applicant
will be deemed to have withdrawn the application, unless the Applicant has
during that period requested the Respondent’s consent for an extension of time
and consent has been given. If consent is refused, theApplicantymay;on notice
of motion supported by affidavit, apply to the Judge»President in chambers for
an extension of time.
Clause 11.2.7
A review application is by its nature anyurgent application. An applicant in a
review application is therefore required to ensure that all the necessary papers
in the application are filed within twelve (12) months of the date of the launch
of the application (excluding Heads of Arguments) and the Registrar is informed
in writing that the application is ready for allocation for hearing. Where this time
limit is not complied with, the application will be archived and be regarded as
lapsed unless good cause is shown why the application should not be archived
or begémoved,from the archive.
Clause 16.1
In spiteyof any other provision in this manual, the Registrar will archive a file in
the following circumstances:
4p in the case of an application in terms of Rule 7 or Rule 7A, when a period of
six months has elapsed without any steps taken by the applicant from the
date of filing the application, or the date of the last process filed;
2. in the case of referrals in terms of Rule 6, when a period of six months has
elapsed from the date of delivery of a statement of case without any steps
taken by the referring party from the date on which the statement of claim
was filed, or the date on which the last process was filed.