Checkport SA (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JA1/2007) [2008] ZALAC 22 (14 May 2008)

Checkport SA (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JA1/2007) [2008] ZALAC 22 (14 May 2008)

The Labour Appeal Court found that the arbitrator's award was based on speculation rather than evidence. The uncontested testimony of the employer's witness established that any scanner malfunction would have been clearly indicated to the operators, and there was no credible evidence that both scanners failed...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2008] ZALAC 22
Parties
Appellant: Checkport SA (Pty) Limited; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration & Others
Court
Labour Appeal Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
14 May 2008
Case Number
JA1/2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Review Judgment
Outcome
Appeal upheld; arbitration award set aside and substituted with a finding that the dismissals were substantively and procedurally fair.
Judges
Davis, Leeuw, Ndlovu
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Review of Arbitration Award, Substantive Fairness, Procedural Fairness
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Review of Arbitration Award Substantive Fairness Procedural Fairness

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Checkport SA (Pty) Limited

Appellant

Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration & Others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Review Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the dismissal of the third to fifth respondents was substantively and procedurally fair.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitration award reinstating the employees was a decision a reasonable decision maker could have reached.
  3. 3 Whether the evidence supported the conclusion that the scanners malfunctioned or that the employees failed to use them.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Appeal Court found that the arbitrator's award was based on speculation rather than evidence. The uncontested testimony of the employer's witness established that any scanner malfunction would have been clearly indicated to the operators, and there was no credible evidence that both scanners failed simultaneously. The only reasonable inference was that the employees failed to scan the majority of passengers, which constituted a serious breach of their duties. Therefore, the dismissals were substantively and procedurally fair, and the arbitration award reinstating the employees was set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; arbitration award set aside and substituted with a finding that the dismissals were substantively and procedurally fair.

Orders

  • The award of the second respondent is set aside.
  • It is substituted with an award that the dismissal of the third to fifth respondents was substantively and procedurally fair.