Anglo Operations Limited (New Denmark Colliery) v Independent Mediation Service of South Africa and Others (J4783/2000) [2002] ZALC 157 (31 July 2002)
The court considered whether the arbitrator exceeded his powers in making the award regarding the substantive fairness of the dismissal. The applicant argued that the arbitrator's decision was outside the scope permitted by the Arbitration Act. The respondents maintained that the arbitrator acted within his powers...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2002] ZALC 157
- Parties
- Applicant: Anglo Operations Limited (New Denmark Colliery); Respondent: Independent Mediation Service of South Africa; Respondent: S Matime N.O.; Respondent: M Nhlanhla; Respondent: National Union of Mineworkers
- Court
- Labour Court
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Case Number
- J4783/2000
- Procedural Posture
- Review Application / Application to Review and Set Aside Arbitration Award
- Outcome
- Application dismissed; arbitration award stands.
- Judges
- Gering AJ
- Legal Topics
- Arbitration Review, Substantive Fairness of Dismissal, Exceeding Arbitrator Powers
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Anglo Operations Limited (New Denmark Colliery)
Applicant
Independent Mediation Service of South Africa
Respondent
S Matime N.O.
Respondent
M Nhlanhla
Respondent
National Union of Mineworkers
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application to Review and Set Aside Arbitration Award
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the arbitrator exceeded his powers under section 33 of the Arbitration Act.
- 2 Whether the dismissal of the third respondent was substantively fair.
- 3 Whether the arbitration award should be set aside.
Ratio Decidendi
The court considered whether the arbitrator exceeded his powers in making the award regarding the substantive fairness of the dismissal. The applicant argued that the arbitrator's decision was outside the scope permitted by the Arbitration Act. The respondents maintained that the arbitrator acted within his powers and that the dismissal was not substantively fair. The court examined the relevant statutory provisions and the facts presented in the paginated bundle. The court found that the arbitrator did not exceed his powers and that the award was within the scope of the Arbitration Act and the Labour Relations Act. Accordingly, the application to set aside the award was dismissed.
Court Disposition
Application dismissed; arbitration award stands.
Orders
- The application to review and set aside the arbitration award is dismissed.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
REPORTABLE
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
SITTING IN JOHANNESBURG
CASE NO J4783/2000
In the matter between:
ANGLO OPERATIONS LIMITED
(NEW DENMARK COLLIERY) Applicant
and
INDEPENDENT MEDIATION SERVICE
OF SOUTH AFRICA First Respondent
S MATIME N.O. Second Respondent
M NHLANHLA Third Respondent
NATIONAL UNION OF MINEWORKERS Fourth Respondent
ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT MR M J VAN AS
ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT MS N THSABALA
TRANSCRIBER
SNELLER RECORDINGS (PROPRIETARY) LTD - DURBAN
J U D G M E N T
GERING AJ
[1] This is an application in terms of section 33(1)(b) of the Arbitration Act, 42 of 1965, (the Arbitration Act) as read with section 157 (3) of the Labour Relations Act, 66 of 1995 ("the LRA") in which the applicant seeks to review and set aside the arbitration award handed down by the second respondent ("the arbitrator") on 31 August 2000.
[2] The third and fourth respondents have opposed the relief sought by the applicant. The first and second respondents abide by the decision of this Court.
[3] There is a paginated bundle of papers, and references to it will be denoted by the capital letter B followed by the relevant page number.
[4] The award which the applicant seeks to set aside is dated 31 August 2000 and appears on B24/25. The issue in dispute was whether the dismissal of third respondent (the employee) was substantively fair.
[5] The ground on which the applicant seeks to review and set aside the award is that the arbitrator exceeded his powers as contemplated in section 33 of the Arbitration Act.