Waterberg Wilderness Lodge v Uses and Others (LCA 16 of 2011) [2011] NAHC 322 (20 October 2011)

Waterberg Wilderness Lodge v Uses and Others (LCA 16 of 2011) [2011] NAHC 322 (20 October 2011)

The arbitrator failed to address the substance of the bias complaint and did not refute the appellant's allegations; thus, the requirements for recusal were met. The referral of the dispute was only properly done for the first respondent, not the other 27, due to non-compliance with procedural rules.

Citation
[2011] NAHC 322
Parties
Appellant: Waterberg Wilderness Lodge; Respondent: Menesia Uses; Respondent: 27 Others
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Namibia
Judgment Date
20 October 2011
Case Number
LCA 16 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Labour Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal upheld
Legal Topics
Arbitrator Recusal, Referral Procedure, Unfair Dismissal, Labour Arbitration
Source Language
English
Labour Law Arbitrator Recusal Referral Procedure Unfair Dismissal Labour Arbitration

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Waterberg Wilderness Lodge

Appellant

Menesia Uses

Respondent

27 Others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Labour Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrator should have recused himself due to alleged bias
  2. 2 Whether the referral of the dispute to the Labour Commissioner complied with procedural rules
  3. 3 Whether the award and costs order should stand

Ratio Decidendi

The arbitrator failed to address the substance of the bias complaint and did not refute the appellant's allegations; thus, the requirements for recusal were met. The referral of the dispute was only properly done for the first respondent, not the other 27, due to non-compliance with procedural rules.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld

Orders

  • The award and costs order are set aside.
  • The dispute of the first respondent is referred back for arbitration by a different arbitrator.