DHL SUPPLY CHAIN v De Beer NO (DA4/2013) [2014] ZALAC 124 (13 May 2014)

DHL SUPPLY CHAIN v De Beer NO (DA4/2013) [2014] ZALAC 124 (13 May 2014)

The Labour Appeal Court held that the dismissal of the third and fourth respondents was not proven on a balance of probabilities. The evidence relied upon by DHL, including the failed polygraph tests and circumstantial factors, was insufficient to establish guilt. The arbitrator and the Labour Court correctly found that polygraph evidence, in the absence of expert testimony, could not be regarded as reliable or corroborative. The cessation of stock losses after suspension and the respondents' alleged lack of credibility did not justify an adverse inference. The Court further held that reinstatement was appropriate, as no intolerability or impracticability was established, and other...

Citation
[2014] ZALAC 124
Parties
Appellant: DHL SUPPLY CHAIN (PTY) LTD; Respondent: DE BEER N.O.; Respondent: NATIONAL BARGAINING COUNCIL FOR THE ROAD FREIGHT INDUSTRY; Respondent: R DUBE; Respondent: E MASINGA
Court
Labour Appeal Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 May 2014
Case Number
DA4/2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Court Judgment Affirming Arbitration Award
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; reinstatement order confirmed.
Judges
Ndlovu JA, Molemela AJA, Sutherland AJA
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Polygraph Evidence, Reinstatement, Burden of Proof, Circumstantial Evidence
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Polygraph Evidence Reinstatement Burden of Proof Circumstantial Evidence

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DHL SUPPLY CHAIN (PTY) LTD

Appellant

DE BEER N.O.

Respondent

NATIONAL BARGAINING COUNCIL FOR THE ROAD FREIGHT INDUSTRY

Respondent

R DUBE

Respondent

E MASINGA

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Court Judgment Affirming Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the dismissal of the third and fourth respondents for alleged theft was proven on a balance of probabilities.
  2. 2 Whether reinstatement was an appropriate remedy in the circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Appeal Court held that the dismissal of the third and fourth respondents was not proven on a balance of probabilities. The evidence relied upon by DHL, including the failed polygraph tests and circumstantial factors, was insufficient to establish guilt. The arbitrator and the Labour Court correctly found that polygraph evidence, in the absence of expert testimony, could not be regarded as reliable or corroborative. The cessation of stock losses after suspension and the respondents' alleged lack of credibility did not justify an adverse inference. The Court further held that reinstatement was appropriate, as no intolerability or impracticability was established, and other...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; reinstatement order confirmed.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.
  • The award granting reinstatement with effect from 28 August 2008 is confirmed.