Baloyi v Swiss Wholesalers (J2736/99) [1999] ZALC 142 (7 September 1999)

Baloyi v Swiss Wholesalers (J2736/99) [1999] ZALC 142 (7 September 1999)

The court found that, although there was a jurisdictional question regarding whether the CCMA could adjudicate an automatic unfair dismissal based on pregnancy, the respondent had not challenged the award by way of review or rescission. The court did not have all the documentation regarding the referral to the CCMA, but in the absence of any evidence to the contrary and to give effect to the primary purposes of the Labour Relations Act, the award should be made an order of court. The collateral attack rule was considered, and the court held that unless a challenge is made at the right time and place, an order may stand even if jurisdiction was lacking. The applicant was entitled to...

Citation
[1999] ZALC 142
Parties
Applicant: Petunia Baloyi; Respondent: Swiss Wholesalers
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 September 1999
Case Number
J2736/99
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application to Make Arbitration Award an Order of Court
Outcome
Application granted; arbitration award made an order of court.
Judges
Macrobert
Legal Topics
Automatic Unfair Dismissal, Pregnancy Discrimination, Arbitration Award Enforcement, Jurisdiction of Ccma
Labour Law Administrative Law Automatic Unfair Dismissal Pregnancy Discrimination Arbitration Award Enforcement Jurisdiction of Ccma

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Petunia Baloyi

Applicant

Swiss Wholesalers

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application to Make Arbitration Award an Order of Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitration award issued by the CCMA should be made an order of the Labour Court.
  2. 2 Whether the CCMA had jurisdiction to adjudicate an automatic unfair dismissal based on pregnancy under section 187(e) of the Labour Relations Act.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent had an opportunity to challenge or review the arbitration award.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that, although there was a jurisdictional question regarding whether the CCMA could adjudicate an automatic unfair dismissal based on pregnancy, the respondent had not challenged the award by way of review or rescission. The court did not have all the documentation regarding the referral to the CCMA, but in the absence of any evidence to the contrary and to give effect to the primary purposes of the Labour Relations Act, the award should be made an order of court. The collateral attack rule was considered, and the court held that unless a challenge is made at the right time and place, an order may stand even if jurisdiction was lacking. The applicant was entitled to...

Court Disposition

Application granted; arbitration award made an order of court.

Orders

  • The award of Commissioner Mudau dated 17 June 1999 is made an order of the Labour Court.
  • The respondent is ordered to pay the costs of the application.