Cashbuild (Pty) Ltd v Ramothela NO and Others (JR 2763/08) [2010] ZALC 35 (19 March 2010)

Cashbuild (Pty) Ltd v Ramothela NO and Others (JR 2763/08) [2010] ZALC 35 (19 March 2010)

The Labour Court found that the applicant failed to comply with rule 5(3) of the Court Rules by not lodging original affidavits, and no explanation was provided for this non-compliance. Even if condoned, the grounds of review were baseless. The commissioner had properly considered the evidence, made credibility findings, and applied the law. The third respondent's version of events was more probable and unchallenged, and her reaction to being touched was spontaneous and not intended to cause harm. The commissioner was justified in finding the dismissal substantively unfair and ordering reinstatement with twelve months' back pay. The applicant's arguments regarding procedural defects, the...

Citation
[2010] ZALC 35
Parties
Applicant: Cashbuild (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Ramotshela, MS N.O.; Respondent: The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Ngobeni, Basani
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 March 2010
Case Number
JR 2763/08
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
Application for review dismissed.
Judges
Francis
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Arbitration Review, Procedural Fairness, Substantive Fairness, Sexual Harassment, Remedies for Unfair Dismissal
Labour Law Unfair Dismissal Arbitration Review Procedural Fairness Substantive Fairness Sexual Harassment Remedies for Unfair Dismissal

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

Parties

Cashbuild (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Ramotshela, MS N.O.

Respondent

The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Ngobeni, Basani

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitration award issued by the commissioner was reviewable under section 145 of the Labour Relations Act.
  2. 2 Whether the dismissal of the third respondent was substantively and procedurally fair.
  3. 3 Whether the commissioner properly considered the evidence and applied the law in awarding reinstatement and back pay.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Court found that the applicant failed to comply with rule 5(3) of the Court Rules by not lodging original affidavits, and no explanation was provided for this non-compliance. Even if condoned, the grounds of review were baseless. The commissioner had properly considered the evidence, made credibility findings, and applied the law. The third respondent's version of events was more probable and unchallenged, and her reaction to being touched was spontaneous and not intended to cause harm. The commissioner was justified in finding the dismissal substantively unfair and ordering reinstatement with twelve months' back pay. The applicant's arguments regarding procedural defects, the...

Court Disposition

Application for review dismissed.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • There is no order as to costs.