Molapi v Metro Cash And Carry (Pty) Ltd (LC/REV 66 of 9) [2012] LSLC 13 (8 October 2012)

Molapi v Metro Cash And Carry (Pty) Ltd (LC/REV 66 of 9) [2012] LSLC 13 (8 October 2012)

The arbitrator's decision was not rationally justifiable as the claims for provident fund and unpaid leave were not part of the original unfair dismissal referral and only arose upon retirement; thus, the matter was not res judicata. Further, it was irregular for the arbitrator to rely on a previous DDPR decision as precedent.

Citation
[2012] LSLC 13
Parties
Applicant: Pascalis Molapi; Respondent: Metro Cash and Carry (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
8 October 2012
Case Number
LC/REV 66 of 9
Procedural Posture
Review of Arbitration Award / Judgment
Outcome
Application for review succeeds; arbitration award set aside; matter remitted for hearing of claims.
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Res Judicata, Provident Fund Claims, Unpaid Leave Claims, Review of Arbitration Awards
Source Language
English
Labour Law Unfair Dismissal Res Judicata Provident Fund Claims Unpaid Leave Claims Review of Arbitration Awards

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pascalis Molapi

Applicant

Metro Cash and Carry (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review of Arbitration Award / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's claims for provident fund and unpaid leave are res judicata
  2. 2 Whether the arbitrator erred in law by relying on a previous DDPR decision as precedent

Ratio Decidendi

The arbitrator's decision was not rationally justifiable as the claims for provident fund and unpaid leave were not part of the original unfair dismissal referral and only arose upon retirement; thus, the matter was not res judicata. Further, it was irregular for the arbitrator to rely on a previous DDPR decision as precedent.

Court Disposition

Application for review succeeds; arbitration award set aside; matter remitted for hearing of claims.

Orders

  • The application for review succeeds and the award in C058/2009 is reviewed, corrected and set aside.
  • The DDPR must hear Applicant’s claims for provident fund and leave earned but not taken.