NUMSA obo Members as per Annexure “A” v Macsteel Service Centres South Africa (Pty) Ltd

NUMSA, acting on behalf of dismissed employees of Macsteel, referred an unfair dismissal dispute to the Labour Court. The statement of case was due on 27 July 2023 but was filed 48 days late on 13 September 2023. NUMSA applied for condonation, explaining the delay after 27 July 2023 but failing to explain an earlier change in its understanding of the reason for dismissal (from participation in an unprotected strike to misconduct), which had occurred before the due date. The court refused condonation. NUMSA applied for leave to appeal, which was granted. Macsteel then applied for rescission of the order granting leave to appeal, contending that its opposing submissions had not been considered and that leave to appeal had been wrongly granted.

The application for rescission was dismissed. No order as to costs was made.

The judgment clarifies the approach to applications for leave to appeal in the Labour Court, particularly the interpretation of section 17 of the Superior Courts Act and the role of 'compelling reasons'. It also highlights an unresolved and important procedural question in labour litigation: whether conduct prior to the expiry of the statutory referral period must be explained in condonation applications. The case underscores the distinction between PAJA review principles and Labour Relations Act referral procedures.