With reference to Dengetenge Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Southern Sphere Mining and Developments Co Ltd and Others [2013] 2 All SA 251 (SCA); [2013] JOL 30158
(SCA), what are the factors recently restated by the supreme court of appeal in Mhlontlo Local Municipality and Others v Ngcangula and Another (2024) 35 SALLR
132 (SCA) to be taken into account when evaluating applications for condonation?
_____________________________________
- It is trite that applications for condonation must contain a proper explanation for the period(s) of delay (SA Express Ltd v Bagport (Pty) Ltd [2020] ZASCA 13; 2020 (5) SA 404 (SCA), at paragraph [34]).
- The SCA held, in Dengetenge (supra), that other factors to be considered in determining whether to grant condonation include:
- ‘[11] …the degree of non-compliance, the explanation therefor, the importance of the case, a respondent’s interest in the finality of the judgment of the court below, the convenience of this court and the avoidance of unnecessary delay in the administration of justice (per Holmes JA in Federated Employers Fire & General Insurance Co Ltd and Another v McKenzie 1969 (3) SA 360 (A), at 362F-G).’
- In casu, the SCA took into account that it would be in the interests of justice to grant condonation as the delay was not excessive and the respondents had not been financially or otherwise prejudiced. It also took into account the prospects of success, which is an important, although not decisive, consideration (Commissioner for South African Revenue Services, Gauteng West v Levue Investments (Pty) Ltd [2007] ZASCA 22; [2007] 3 All SA 109 (SCA), at paragraph [11]).
