Benzo and Others v Paardekraal Crushers (J4055/99) [2002] ZALC 179 (22 October 2002)

45 Reportability

Brief Summary

Labour Law — Condonation — Late referral of dispute — Applicants seeking condonation for referral 31 days late — Respondent opposing on grounds of delay and lack of prospects of success — Court finding that applicants established prima facie case and degree of lateness not substantial — Condonation granted.

Sneller Verbatim/HDJ
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
BRAAMFONTEIN CASE NO: J4055/99
2002-10-22
In the matter between
ALBERT BENZO & OTHERS Applicants
and
PAARDEKRAAL CRUSHERS Respondent
_______________________________________________________________
_
J U D G M E N T
_______________________________________________________________
_
REVELAS J:
1. The   applicants   have   brought   an   application   for   the  
condonation   of   the   late   referral   of   their   dispute   to  
the Labour Court.   The referral of the dispute was 31  
days out of time.  There were several developments, but  
it is not necessary to refer to them herein as I intend  
only to give brief reasons for the order I am about to  
make.
1. 1. 2. The main objection by Paardekraal Crushers against

my   granting     condonation   was   firstly   that   the  
applicants have waited so long to bring the application  
for   condonation   (two   years);   and   secondly,   that   the  
applicants   had   no   prospects   of   success   as   they   were  
summarily dismissed during an unprotected strike which  
the applicants claim, was protected, but that thus far  
the applicants have failed to produce proof that proper  
48 hours notice of the strike was given. The applicants  
aver in an affidavit that such notice was given.   The  
respondents   contend   that   this   affidavit   does   not  
necessarily cover the facts of the matter nor does it  
establish any grounds to believe that proper notice was  
in   fact   given.   Therefore   I   should   not   grant  
condonation.
3. In   determining   this   issue,   I   have   to   consider   the  
degree of lateness, the explanation for the delay, and  
the   prospects   of   success   and   the   importance   of   the  
matter.  
4. Insofar as the prospects of success are concerned, the  
applicants   have   made   out   a   prima   facie   case   and   it  
would be premature at this stage to decide the status  
of the notice.  A copy may very well be produced.  The  
degree of lateness is not substantial.   It was thirty  
one   days.     The   applicants   have   only   brought   the  
application   for   condonation   now   two   years   later,   but

the   point   has   only   been   raised   now   after   the   parties  
have   been  to   court  twice   and  the   matter  has   been  set  
down   twice,   and   subsequently   postponed.   Pre­trial  
minutes have been handed up.  All these exercises have  
already been gone through and in these circumstances I  
believe that I should grant condonation.
5. Therefore I make the following order:  
1. 1. The   application   for   condonation   of   the   late  
referral   of   the   applicants'   dismissal   to   the   labour  
court is hereby condoned.
________________
E. Revelas