Construction and Allied Workers Union v Becker Crushers CC (J548/97) [1999] ZALC 113 (26 July 1999)

Construction and Allied Workers Union v Becker Crushers CC (J548/97) [1999] ZALC 113 (26 July 1999)

The Labour Court found that the applicants did not allege any of the grounds in section 191(5) that would entitle the court to adjudicate the dispute directly. The referral statement did not contain allegations of automatically unfair dismissal or other qualifying grounds. The matter was improperly referred to the Labour Court, as the statutory requirements for direct referral were not met. In terms of section 158(2), the court determined that it was not expedient to deal with the matter as an arbitrator and accordingly referred the dispute to arbitration. No order as to costs was made.

Citation
[1999] ZALC 113
Parties
Applicant: Construction & Allied Workers Union; Respondent: Becker Crushers CC
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 July 1999
Case Number
J548/97
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Referral From CCMA After Failed Conciliation and Arbitration Jurisdictional Dispute
Outcome
Proceedings stayed and matter referred to arbitration; no order as to costs.
Judges
S.J Ngwenya
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Jurisdiction of Ccma, Referral to Arbitration, Section 191 Lra, Section 158 Lra
Labour Law Unfair Dismissal Jurisdiction of Ccma Referral to Arbitration Section 191 Lra Section 158 Lra

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Construction & Allied Workers Union

Applicant

Becker Crushers CC

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Referral From CCMA After Failed Conciliation and Arbitration Jurisdictional Dispute

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the Labour Court have jurisdiction to adjudicate the alleged unfair dismissal in terms of section 191 of the Labour Relations Act?
  2. 2 Was the matter properly referred to the Labour Court or should it have been referred to arbitration?
  3. 3 Did the applicants allege grounds that would entitle the Labour Court to adjudicate the dispute directly?

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Court found that the applicants did not allege any of the grounds in section 191(5) that would entitle the court to adjudicate the dispute directly. The referral statement did not contain allegations of automatically unfair dismissal or other qualifying grounds. The matter was improperly referred to the Labour Court, as the statutory requirements for direct referral were not met. In terms of section 158(2), the court determined that it was not expedient to deal with the matter as an arbitrator and accordingly referred the dispute to arbitration. No order as to costs was made.

Court Disposition

Proceedings stayed and matter referred to arbitration; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The proceedings in the Labour Court are stayed.
  • The dispute is referred to arbitration.