The applicant, a municipal election candidate, failed to file required campaign financial documents by the statutory deadline under the Municipal Elections Act, 1996.
He sought an extension of time to file the documents, but the application itself was brought after the deadline for applying had passed.
The applicant therefore made two applications: first, to extend the time to apply for an extension, and second, to extend the time to file the documents themselves.
The court found strong mitigating circumstances, including good faith efforts to comply, reliance on an accountant who lacked proper qualifications, and the unexpected early birth of the applicant's child during the critical period.
The court granted both applications, finding that the Act should not operate as a trap for the unskilled or unwary.
