CVO School Vivo v Pretorius and Others; CVO School Vivo v Pretorius and Others (JR1006/15; JR1004/15) [2017] ZALCJHB 412 (6 April 2017)

CVO School Vivo v Pretorius and Others; CVO School Vivo v Pretorius and Others (JR1006/15; JR1004/15) [2017] ZALCJHB 412 (6 April 2017)

The Labour Court found that the dismissals of both Christoffel Daniel Pretorius and Antoinette Pretorius were procedurally unfair due to gross failures in the disciplinary and retrenchment processes. Christoffel was denied a fair hearing and an opportunity to address sanction, with the decision to dismiss made by the school governing body without his participation, amounting to a predetermined and biased process. Antoinette was retrenched without any consultation or compliance with section 189 of the LRA, and was simply informed of her dismissal as a fait accompli. The arbitrators' findings of procedural unfairness were correct and reasonable. The compensation awarded to Christoffel (12...

Citation
[2017] ZALCJHB 412
Parties
Applicant: CVO School Vivo; Respondent: Christoffel Daniel Pretorius; Respondent: Antoinette Pretorius; Respondent: Josias Sello Maake N.O.; Respondent: Matthews Ramotshela N.O.; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
6 April 2017
Case Number
JR1006/15; JR1004/15
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Consolidated Review Applications
Outcome
The review applications by CVO School Vivo are dismissed. The arbitration awards in favour of Christoffel Daniel Pretorius and Antoinette Pretorius are upheld, except that the compensation awarded to Antoinette Pretorius is reduced from 8 months' salary to 4 months' salary.
Judges
S Snyman
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Procedural Fairness, Compensation Awards, Retrenchment, Review of Arbitration Award, Disciplinary Hearing
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Procedural Fairness Compensation Awards Retrenchment Review of Arbitration Award Disciplinary Hearing

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 5 Authorities cited 32 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CVO School Vivo

Applicant

Christoffel Daniel Pretorius

Respondent

Antoinette Pretorius

Respondent

Josias Sello Maake N.O.

Respondent

Matthews Ramotshela N.O.

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Consolidated Review Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the dismissals of Christoffel Daniel Pretorius and Antoinette Pretorius by CVO School Vivo were substantively and/or procedurally unfair.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitration awards in favour of the respondents were reasonable and reviewable under section 145 of the LRA.
  3. 3 Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the arbitrators was just and equitable.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Court found that the dismissals of both Christoffel Daniel Pretorius and Antoinette Pretorius were procedurally unfair due to gross failures in the disciplinary and retrenchment processes. Christoffel was denied a fair hearing and an opportunity to address sanction, with the decision to dismiss made by the school governing body without his participation, amounting to a predetermined and biased process. Antoinette was retrenched without any consultation or compliance with section 189 of the LRA, and was simply informed of her dismissal as a fait accompli. The arbitrators' findings of procedural unfairness were correct and reasonable. The compensation awarded to Christoffel (12...

Court Disposition

The review applications by CVO School Vivo are dismissed. The arbitration awards in favour of Christoffel Daniel Pretorius and Antoinette Pretorius are upheld, except that the compensation awarded to Antoinette Pretorius is reduced from 8 months' salary to 4 months' salary.

Orders

  • The arbitration award of arbitrator Josias Sello Maake dated 17 May 2015 under case number LP 8051-14 is upheld, and the applicant’s application under case number JR 1006/15 is dismissed with costs.
  • The arbitration award of arbitrator Matthews Ramotshela dated 13 May 2015 under case number LP 8055-14, finding the dismissal of Antoinette Pretorius procedurally unfair, is upheld, and the applicant’s application under case number JR 1004/15 in this respect is dismissed.