Condonation of delay accepted where counsel's accident and hospitalisation explained the late appeal filing.

A delay of about 10 months in filing an appeal was condoned where the appellant showed that the previous advocate had suffered a serious accident and was hospitalised, and the appellant later discovered that no appeal had been filed. The Tribunal accepted this explanation as sufficient cause on the facts, applying the principle that default by counsel may justify condonation where the circumstances are peculiar and the explanation is credible. The delay was therefore condoned.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay of about 10 months in filing the appeal should be condoned.

Analysis: The delay was attributed to the appellant's previous advocate having met with a serious accident and being hospitalised, and to the appellant's subsequent discovery that no appeal had in fact been filed. Relying on the principle that default by counsel may constitute sufficient cause, the Tribunal accepted the explanation in the peculiar facts of the case.

Outcome: The delay was condoned.

---