Arends and Others v South African Local Government Bargaining Council and Others (PA6/13) [2014] ZALAC 69; [2015] 1 BLLR 23 (LAC); (2015) 36 ILJ 1200 (LAC) (6 November 2014)

Arends and Others v South African Local Government Bargaining Council and Others (PA6/13) [2014] ZALAC 69; [2015] 1 BLLR 23 (LAC); (2015) 36 ILJ 1200 (LAC) (6 November 2014)

The Labour Appeal Court found that the arbitration proceedings were procedurally irregular because the arbitrator ruled on a jurisdictional point raised for the first time in written submissions without affording the appellants an opportunity to respond. This denied the appellants a fair hearing and constituted a reviewable irregularity under section 145 of the Labour Relations Act, as informed by the constitutional right to fair administrative action. The Court held that both parties contributed to the procedural shortcomings by failing to agree on a proper stated case or pre-arbitration process. Due to the absence of evidence and a clear factual basis, neither the arbitrator nor the...

Citation
[2014] ZALAC 69
Parties
Appellant: C Arends & Others; Respondent: South African Local Government Bargaining Council; Respondent: Martin Le Roux Koorts N.O.; Respondent: Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan Municipality
Court
Labour Appeal Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
6 November 2014
Case Number
PA6/13
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Appeal From Labour Court Judgment Dismissing Review of Arbitrator's Jurisdictional Ruling
Outcome
Appeal upheld; Labour Court order and arbitrator's award set aside; no order as to costs.
Judges
Murphy AJA, Waglay JP, Dlodlo AJA
Legal Topics
Collective Agreement Interpretation, Arbitration Jurisdiction, Unilateral Change to Terms, Reviewable Irregularity, Procedural Fairness
Labour Law Civil Procedure Collective Agreement Interpretation Arbitration Jurisdiction Unilateral Change to Terms Reviewable Irregularity 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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C Arends & Others

Appellant

South African Local Government Bargaining Council

Respondent

Martin Le Roux Koorts N.O.

Respondent

Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Appeal From Labour Court Judgment Dismissing Review of Arbitrator's Jurisdictional Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrator committed a reviewable irregularity by ruling on jurisdiction without affording the appellants an opportunity to reply.
  2. 2 Whether the dispute concerned the interpretation or application of a collective agreement, thus falling within the arbitrator's jurisdiction under section 24(5) of the Labour Relations Act.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitration proceedings were conducted in a procedurally fair manner.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Appeal Court found that the arbitration proceedings were procedurally irregular because the arbitrator ruled on a jurisdictional point raised for the first time in written submissions without affording the appellants an opportunity to respond. This denied the appellants a fair hearing and constituted a reviewable irregularity under section 145 of the Labour Relations Act, as informed by the constitutional right to fair administrative action. The Court held that both parties contributed to the procedural shortcomings by failing to agree on a proper stated case or pre-arbitration process. Due to the absence of evidence and a clear factual basis, neither the arbitrator nor the...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; Labour Court order and arbitrator's award set aside; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld with no order as to costs.
  • The order of the Labour Court is set aside and substituted with: 'The award of the second respondent dated 15 February 2012 is hereby reviewed and set aside with no order as to costs.'