Lerotholi Polytechnich and Another v Masebofane Ramaema and Others (LC/REV 91 of 2010) [2012] LSLC 25 (21 November 2012)

Lerotholi Polytechnich and Another v Masebofane Ramaema and Others (LC/REV 91 of 2010) [2012] LSLC 25 (21 November 2012)

The grounds raised by the applicant related to the process by which the arbitrator reached the decision and thus qualified as review grounds, but the court found no procedural irregularity or merit in any of the review grounds. The arbitrator considered all relevant evidence and applied the law correctly. The review application was dismissed.

Citation
[2012] LSLC 25
Parties
Applicant: Lerotholi Polytechnic; Applicant: Rector – Lerotholi Polytechnic; Respondent: ‘Masebofane Ramaema; Respondent: Puleng Sakoane; Respondent: Director - DDPR
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
21 November 2012
Case Number
LC/REV 91 of 2010
Procedural Posture
Labour Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
Review application dismissed
Legal Topics
Review of Arbitration Award, Unfair Dismissal, Reinstatement, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
English
Labour Law Review of Arbitration Award Unfair Dismissal Reinstatement Procedural Fairness

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 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lerotholi Polytechnic

Applicant

Rector – Lerotholi Polytechnic

Applicant

‘Masebofane Ramaema

Respondent

Puleng Sakoane

Respondent

Director - DDPR

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Labour Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the grounds raised by the applicant are review or appeal grounds
  2. 2 Whether the arbitrator erred in finding unfair dismissal on inconsistency
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator erred in awarding reinstatement despite alleged negligence

Ratio Decidendi

The grounds raised by the applicant related to the process by which the arbitrator reached the decision and thus qualified as review grounds, but the court found no procedural irregularity or merit in any of the review grounds. The arbitrator considered all relevant evidence and applied the law correctly. The review application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Review application dismissed

Orders

  • The review application is dismissed
  • The DDPR award in A0035/2012 remains in force