Ngwako Rocky Modika v CCMA Johannesburg and Others

The applicant sought to review and set aside a jurisdictional ruling issued by a CCMA commissioner on 29 January 2018, which held that the CCMA lacked jurisdiction to determine his dispute and directed that the file be closed. The applicant launched a review application in the Labour Court but did so far outside the prescribed six-week period, failed to properly serve the application on the respondents, did not file a valid condonation application, failed to file and serve the record of proceedings, and did not comply with multiple provisions of the Labour Court Rules and the Practice Manual. Despite being alerted by the third respondent’s attorneys to these defects and requested to remove the matter from the roll, the applicant’s attorneys persisted with the litigation.

The review application was dismissed. The third respondent’s costs were ordered to be paid de bonis propriis by M S Mnisi Attorneys on an attorney-and-client scale, provisionally, with the attorneys afforded seven days to make submissions as to why the costs order should not be confirmed. The Registrar was directed to forward the judgment to the Legal Practice Council.

The case underscores the binding nature of the Labour Court Rules and the Practice Manual and reaffirms that review applications must be prosecuted expeditiously and in strict compliance with procedural requirements. It is significant for its firm stance on procedural discipline in labour litigation and for illustrating circumstances in which a court will grant a punitive costs order de bonis propriis against legal practitioners.