The court found that the applicant's explanation for delay in filing the appeal was inadequate and unsupported by any documentary evidence, such as a diary extract. The applicant failed to demonstrate sufficient cause for the delay, and there was no evidence that the respondent or the applicant was unavailable at the time of judgment delivery. The applicant did not adduce evidence at trial, and the trial court could not be faulted for not considering evidence that was not presented. The draft memorandum of appeal did not disclose any arguable grounds with a probability of success. The court concluded that the applicant had not justified the termination of the respondent's employment under Section 47(5) of the Employment Act and had not met the threshold for grant of stay of execution or leave to appeal out of time. Accordingly, the application was declined.