Dinkwenyana and Another v Bokoni Platinum Mine and Others (JR1179/11) [2014] ZALCJHB 427 (22 October 2014)
The court found that the delay in filing the review application was not excessive and the explanation was plausible, granting condonation. On the merits, the court held that the commissioner properly investigated the evidence regarding recruitment procedures, allocation of marks, and signing of questionnaires. The applicant failed to explain the allocation of marks and did not follow required procedures. The commissioner applied his mind to the evidence and reached a decision that a reasonable commissioner could have reached. The grounds for review were not established, and the award was not unreasonable or tainted by gross irregularity. The application for review and setting aside of the...
- Citation
- [2014] ZALCJHB 427
- Parties
- Applicant: Charles Dinkwenyana; Applicant: National Union of Mine Workers; Respondent: Bokoni Platinum Mine; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Francis Kganyago N.O.
- Court
- Labour Court Johannesburg
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 22 October 2014
- Case Number
- JR1179/11
- Procedural Posture
- Review Application / Judgment on Review and Condonation
- Outcome
- Application for review and setting aside of the arbitration award is dismissed. Condonation for late filing is granted.
- Judges
- Shai
- Legal Topics
- Review of Arbitration Award, Condonation for Late Filing, Substantive Fairness of Dismissal, Gross Irregularity, Misconduct in Employment
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Charles Dinkwenyana
Applicant
National Union of Mine Workers
Applicant
Bokoni Platinum Mine
Respondent
Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration
Respondent
Francis Kganyago N.O.
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review and Condonation
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether condonation for late filing of the review application should be granted.
- 2 Whether the arbitration award finding the dismissal substantively fair was reviewable on grounds of gross irregularity or misconduct.
- 3 Whether the commissioner failed to properly investigate and apply his mind to the evidence regarding recruitment procedures and allocation of marks.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the delay in filing the review application was not excessive and the explanation was plausible, granting condonation. On the merits, the court held that the commissioner properly investigated the evidence regarding recruitment procedures, allocation of marks, and signing of questionnaires. The applicant failed to explain the allocation of marks and did not follow required procedures. The commissioner applied his mind to the evidence and reached a decision that a reasonable commissioner could have reached. The grounds for review were not established, and the award was not unreasonable or tainted by gross irregularity. The application for review and setting aside of the...
Court Disposition
Application for review and setting aside of the arbitration award is dismissed. Condonation for late filing is granted.
Orders
- The application for review and setting aside of the Third Respondent's award dated 19 March 2014 issued under the auspices of the First Respondent under case no LP 4695-10 is dismissed.
- The First and Second Respondents are ordered to pay the costs of the application jointly and severally.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment