Cape Peninsula University of Technology v Kabengele and Others (CA22/2022) [2024] ZALAC 51; (2024) 45 ILJ 1973 (LAC); [2024] 6 BLLR 553 (LAC) (27 March 2024)

Cape Peninsula University of Technology v Kabengele and Others (CA22/2022) [2024] ZALAC 51; (2024) 45 ILJ 1973 (LAC); [2024] 6 BLLR 553 (LAC) (27 March 2024)

The Labour Appeal Court held that, although Mr Kabengele did not expressly plead correctness as the review test, his pleadings made it clear that he considered the arbitration award to be wrong. The Court found that technical defences should not be readily accepted in labour litigation, given the constitutional right to fair labour practices and the objectives of the LRA. Objectively, the facts established that Mr Kabengele held a reasonable expectation that his fixed-term contract would be renewed for a further year, but not on a permanent basis. The Labour Court was correct to set aside the arbitration award, but erred in ordering permanent reinstatement. The appropriate remedy was...

Citation
[2024] ZALAC 51
Parties
Appellant: Cape Peninsula University of Technology; Respondent: Kantu Thomas Kabengele; Respondent: M Van Rooyen N.O.; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration
Court
Labour Appeal Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
27 March 2024
Case Number
CA22/2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Court Judgment and Orders
Outcome
Appeal succeeds in part; cross-appeal dismissed; Labour Court order set aside and replaced with compensation order.
Judges
Molahlehi, Savage, Mlambo
Legal Topics
Fixed Term Contracts, Reasonable Expectation, Unfair Dismissal, Compensation, Review of Arbitration Award
Labour Law Civil Procedure Fixed Term Contracts Reasonable Expectation Unfair Dismissal Compensation Review of Arbitration Award

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cape Peninsula University of Technology

Appellant

Kantu Thomas Kabengele

Respondent

M Van Rooyen N.O.

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Court Judgment and Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Labour Court erred in reviewing and setting aside the CCMA arbitration award on the basis of correctness rather than reasonableness.
  2. 2 Whether Mr Kabengele proved a reasonable expectation of renewal of his fixed-term contract under section 186(1)(b) of the LRA.
  3. 3 Whether reinstatement or compensation is the appropriate remedy for unfair dismissal in the circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Appeal Court held that, although Mr Kabengele did not expressly plead correctness as the review test, his pleadings made it clear that he considered the arbitration award to be wrong. The Court found that technical defences should not be readily accepted in labour litigation, given the constitutional right to fair labour practices and the objectives of the LRA. Objectively, the facts established that Mr Kabengele held a reasonable expectation that his fixed-term contract would be renewed for a further year, but not on a permanent basis. The Labour Court was correct to set aside the arbitration award, but erred in ordering permanent reinstatement. The appropriate remedy was...

Court Disposition

Appeal succeeds in part; cross-appeal dismissed; Labour Court order set aside and replaced with compensation order.

Orders

  • The appeal succeeds in part.
  • The order of the Labour Court is set aside and substituted as follows: The review application succeeds; the arbitration award of the CCMA in case number WECT 1288-21 is set aside and substituted to read: (i) The applicant, Mr Kantu Kabengele, was dismissed from his employment by the respondent, Cape Peninsula...