Cashbuild (Pty) Ltd v DDPR and Others (LC/REV 92 of 8) [2010] LSLC 30 (7 December 2010)

Cashbuild (Pty) Ltd v DDPR and Others (LC/REV 92 of 8) [2010] LSLC 30 (7 December 2010)

The dismissal of the 3rd respondent was substantively fair as the evidence and the arbitrator's own findings established his guilt and disregard of procedures; alleged inconsistency in sanctions was not justified by the evidence and did not warrant reinstatement.

Citation
[2010] LSLC 30
Parties
Applicant: Cashbuild (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: DDPR; Respondent: M. Masheane (Arbitrator); Respondent: Tsepiso Posholi
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
7 December 2010
Case Number
LC/REV 92 of 8
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
award reviewed and set aside; dismissal declared substantively fair
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Substantive Fairness, Procedural Fairness, Review of Arbitral Award
Source Language
English
Labour Law Unfair Dismissal Substantive Fairness Procedural Fairness Review of Arbitral Award

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cashbuild (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

DDPR

Respondent

M. Masheane (Arbitrator)

Respondent

Tsepiso Posholi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the dismissal of the 3rd respondent was substantively unfair
  2. 2 Whether there was inconsistency in the application of sanctions
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator had power to substitute the employer's penalty

Ratio Decidendi

The dismissal of the 3rd respondent was substantively fair as the evidence and the arbitrator's own findings established his guilt and disregard of procedures; alleged inconsistency in sanctions was not justified by the evidence and did not warrant reinstatement.

Court Disposition

award reviewed and set aside; dismissal declared substantively fair

Orders

  • referral in A0570/08 dismissed
  • no order as to costs