Barloworld Equipment SA v Love (JR1636/15) [2017] ZALCJHB 219 (17 May 2017)

Barloworld Equipment SA v Love (JR1636/15) [2017] ZALCJHB 219 (17 May 2017)

The court found that the arbitrator was faced with two conflicting versions regarding the alleged sexual harassment, but the critical piece of evidence—the photograph—was never presented. The arbitrator did not reject either version but weighed the probabilities and found the employer had not discharged its onus to prove guilt. The court held that the arbitrator's decision fell within the bounds of reasonableness, as required by law, and that there was no basis to interfere with the award. The review application was therefore dismissed.

Citation
[2017] ZALCJHB 219
Parties
Applicant: Barloworld Equipment SA; Respondent: Nick Love
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 May 2017
Case Number
JR1636/15
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Review application dismissed. Costs awarded against the applicant.
Judges
G Moshoana
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Sexual Harassment, Review of Arbitration Award, Burden of Proof, Reasonableness of Decision
Labour Law Unfair Dismissal Sexual Harassment Review of Arbitration Award Burden of Proof Reasonableness of Decision

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Barloworld Equipment SA

Applicant

Nick Love

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitration award in favour of the respondent should be reviewed and set aside.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant discharged the onus to prove the fairness of the dismissal for sexual harassment.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator's decision fell within the bounds of reasonableness given the evidence presented.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the arbitrator was faced with two conflicting versions regarding the alleged sexual harassment, but the critical piece of evidence—the photograph—was never presented. The arbitrator did not reject either version but weighed the probabilities and found the employer had not discharged its onus to prove guilt. The court held that the arbitrator's decision fell within the bounds of reasonableness, as required by law, and that there was no basis to interfere with the award. The review application was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Review application dismissed. Costs awarded against the applicant.

Orders

  • The review application is dismissed.
  • The applicant is to pay the costs.