[ad_1]
The Supreme Court of Appeals has reprimanded a KwaZulu-Natal judge for taking four years to pass judgment. (Photo: Ben Bezuidenhout via Wikimedia)
The four-year delay in passing sentence was “an inordinate breach of duty.”
First published in Ground.
The Supreme Court of Appeals (SCA) has criticized a KwaZulu-Natal judge for taking four years to pass a ruling involving a civil lawsuit for damages resulting from a strike.
At decision, written by Acting Judge Glenn Goosen (with the concurrence of four judges), the court says this was “an unconscionable breach of duty.”
The matter before the SCA was an appeal by the National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa against a ruling by Judge Anton Van Zyl in the Pietermaritzburg High Court in favor of Dunlop Mixing and Technical Services. The company had claimed damages for “disturbances”, through the Law of Meetings, derived from a protected strike that had turned violent.
The SCA reversed its ruling, saying the law did not apply because the industrial action was a picket line “in support of a protected strike” authorized by the Labor Relations Act, which grants immunity from civil suits.
Towards the end of the sentence, the court looks at the four-year delay and says: “The (Van Zyl) sentence does not provide any explanation for this extraordinary delay.
“The attorney informed us that while the underlying labor dispute had been resolved long ago, the consequences, in the form of civil litigation (for damages), are clearly not.
“The damage caused by a four-year delay is obvious. How the judge can take four years to decide this matter and issue his sentence is something that is not understood. “
The judges said that if there was a reasonable explanation or excuse, Van Zyl should have established it in his judgment.
“After all, on the basis of rulings handed down by judges, they are held responsible for the administration of justice under their auspices.”
“The absence of an explanation suggests that there isn’t. A delay of four years constitutes an excessive breach of duty … It is a matter that must be considered by the presiding judge of the division in question. “
The Office of the President of the Supreme Court, in its three-term report on reserved sentences, reiterates that judicial norms and standards establish that judges must do everything possible to pass reserved sentences within three months.
At the beginning of the term, there were 607 sentences reserved, with 525 for less than six months and the balance, 82, for longer.
Van Zyl tops the list of offenders in Pietermaritzburg, with two sentences pending for 90 and 84 months, the first reserved on December 12, 2012 and the other on June 4, 2013. He also has three other pending sentences on the Pietermaritzburg list of 18, with pending sentences since November 2017 and two since October 2019.
KZN Chief Justice Achmat Jappie said he had not seen the SCA ruling, but knew that Judge Van Zyl had several long-pending rulings. He said the matter had been referred to the Judicial Services Commission.
“He is not the only judge in this division who has pending sentences, but he is the worst. And it seems that he is not enthusiastic about catching up. “
Judge Jappie said he believed that the Covid-19 pandemic could have influenced the delays in all judicial investigations of this nature.
The spokesman for the Chief Justice’s office, Nathi Mncube, did not respond to a request for comment. DM
