Dempster v Ariel Technology and Others (J94/98) [1998] ZALC 10 (4 May 1998)

Dempster v Ariel Technology and Others (J94/98) [1998] ZALC 10 (4 May 1998)

The court held that the CCMA commissioner exceeded her powers by making a final and binding award at the conciliation stage, determining that the applicant was not an employee for the purposes of the Labour Relations Act. The Labour Relations Act does not empower a conciliator to make such awards; the process is intended to be employee-driven, allowing the employee to refer unresolved disputes for adjudication or arbitration. Jurisdictional facts are determined by the employee, and legal representation is not permitted at conciliation, further supporting that complex legal issues should not be decided at this stage. Accordingly, the commissioner's award was set aside, and the applicant...

Citation
[1998] ZALC 10
Parties
Applicant: C A Dempster; Respondent: Commissioner Nerine Kahn; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Ariel Technologies
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
4 May 1998
Case Number
J94/98
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application to review and set aside the CCMA commissioner's award is granted.
Judges
E Revelas
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of Ccma, Conciliation Vs Arbitration, Employee Definition Under Lra, Powers of Commissioner
Labour Law Civil Procedure Jurisdiction of Ccma Conciliation Vs Arbitration Employee Definition Under Lra Powers of Commissioner

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C A Dempster

Applicant

Commissioner Nerine Kahn

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Ariel Technologies

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a CCMA commissioner has jurisdiction to make a final and binding award at the conciliation stage.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant was precluded from exercising rights under section 191 of the Labour Relations Act due to the commissioner's ruling.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant qualifies as an employee under the Labour Relations Act for the purposes of referral.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the CCMA commissioner exceeded her powers by making a final and binding award at the conciliation stage, determining that the applicant was not an employee for the purposes of the Labour Relations Act. The Labour Relations Act does not empower a conciliator to make such awards; the process is intended to be employee-driven, allowing the employee to refer unresolved disputes for adjudication or arbitration. Jurisdictional facts are determined by the employee, and legal representation is not permitted at conciliation, further supporting that complex legal issues should not be decided at this stage. Accordingly, the commissioner's award was set aside, and the applicant...

Court Disposition

Application to review and set aside the CCMA commissioner's award is granted.

Orders

  • The award (ruling) of Commissioner N. Kahn is hereby set aside.
  • The matter may now be referred to either adjudication or arbitration.