Concor Mining v NUM obo Sekgwele and Others (JR779/2011) [2015] ZALCJHB 417 (30 November 2015)

Concor Mining v NUM obo Sekgwele and Others (JR779/2011) [2015] ZALCJHB 417 (30 November 2015)

The court found that the arbitrator misconstrued the ambit of the charge by focusing solely on whether the speed limit was exceeded, thereby ignoring material and undisputed evidence regarding reckless driving under the prevailing conditions. The arbitrator failed to consider the full scope of the charge, which included reckless driving resulting in a near miss, and not merely speeding. The chairperson's factual findings did not bind the arbitrator, who was required to assess the charge de novo. The court was not persuaded that another court would reach a different conclusion, and therefore dismissed the application for leave to appeal. Condonation for the late filing was granted due to...

Citation
[2015] ZALCJHB 417
Parties
Applicant: Concor Mining; Respondent: NUM obo Sekgwele; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Dheliwe Mavuma (n.o.)
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 November 2015
Case Number
JR779/2011
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Review Judgment
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed; condonation for late filing granted; no order as to costs.
Judges
R Lagrange
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Condonation of Late Filing, Review of Arbitration Award
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Condonation of Late Filing 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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Concor Mining

Applicant

NUM obo Sekgwele

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Dheliwe Mavuma (n.o.)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Review Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether condonation for the late filing of the application for leave to appeal should be granted.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitrator misconstrued the charge and failed to consider relevant evidence.
  3. 3 Whether another court might reasonably come to a different conclusion regarding the fairness of the dismissal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the arbitrator misconstrued the ambit of the charge by focusing solely on whether the speed limit was exceeded, thereby ignoring material and undisputed evidence regarding reckless driving under the prevailing conditions. The arbitrator failed to consider the full scope of the charge, which included reckless driving resulting in a near miss, and not merely speeding. The chairperson's factual findings did not bind the arbitrator, who was required to assess the charge de novo. The court was not persuaded that another court would reach a different conclusion, and therefore dismissed the application for leave to appeal. Condonation for the late filing was granted due to...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed; condonation for late filing granted; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The second respondent’s late filing of his application for leave to appeal is condoned.
  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.