Bezuidenhout t/a DB Bezuidenhout v Pretorius and Others (PR195/13) [2014] ZALCPE 8; (2015) 36 ILJ 211 (LC) (27 May 2014)

Bezuidenhout t/a DB Bezuidenhout v Pretorius and Others (PR195/13) [2014] ZALCPE 8; (2015) 36 ILJ 211 (LC) (27 May 2014)

The court found that the arbitrator failed to conduct the arbitration fairly by refusing to give the applicant's legal representative an audience, failing to disclose a conflict of interest, and deliberately omitting to record the proceedings. The absence of a record deprived the court of the ability to assess the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] ZALCPE 8
Parties
Applicant: D.B. Bezuidenhout t/a D.B. Bezuidenhout; Respondent: D.D Pretorius; Respondent: E. Dirks; Respondent: S. Minnie; Respondent: National Bargaining Council for the Road Freight and Logistics Industry; Respondent: V.H. Le Roux N.O
Court
Labour Court Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
27 May 2014
Case Number
PR195/13
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
The arbitration award issued by the fifth respondent is reviewed and set aside. The matter is remitted for arbitration de novo before a different arbitrator. The fourth and fifth respondents are ordered to pay the applicant's costs on the attorney and client scale, jointly and severally.
Judges
Lallie
Legal Topics
Arbitration Review, Gross Misconduct by Arbitrator, Costs Order, Recusal of Arbitrator
Labour Law Civil Procedure Arbitration Review Gross Misconduct by Arbitrator Costs Order Recusal of Arbitrator

Source-derived case record

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

Parties

D.B. Bezuidenhout t/a D.B. Bezuidenhout

Applicant

D.D Pretorius

Respondent

E. Dirks

Respondent

S. Minnie

Respondent

National Bargaining Council for the Road Freight and Logistics Industry

Respondent

V.H. Le Roux N.O

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitration award issued by the fifth respondent should be reviewed and set aside due to procedural irregularities and misconduct.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitrator breached his duty to act impartially and fairly under the Labour Relations Act.
  3. 3 Whether an adverse costs order should be granted against the arbitrator and the bargaining council.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the arbitrator failed to conduct the arbitration fairly by refusing to give the applicant's legal representative an audience, failing to disclose a conflict of interest, and deliberately omitting to record the proceedings. The absence of a record deprived the court of the ability to assess the evidence on which the award was based. The arbitrator's conduct amounted to gross misconduct and a breach of his duty under the Labour Relations Act. The award was therefore unreasonable and reviewable. The court further held that it was fair and lawful to order the fourth and fifth respondents to pay the applicant's costs on an attorney and client scale due to the deliberate...

Court Disposition

The arbitration award issued by the fifth respondent is reviewed and set aside. The matter is remitted for arbitration de novo before a different arbitrator. The fourth and fifth respondents are ordered to pay the applicant's costs on the attorney and client scale, jointly and severally.

Orders

  • The arbitration award issued by the fifth respondent under case number PE 34/10399/09 and dated 3 December 2013 is reviewed and set aside.
  • The matter is remitted to the fourth respondent to be arbitrated de novo by an arbitrator other than the fifth respondent.