Dolo v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR 1655/07) [2010] ZALC 148; (2011) 32 ILJ 905 (LC) (19 October 2010)
The court found that the applicant's involvement in a fraudulent scheme, although not directed against her employer, undermined her integrity and trustworthiness, which are essential for her position involving cash handling. The arbitrator's decision to redeploy the applicant rather than reinstate her in her original position was reasonable and justified. The applicant's statement under section 204 of the Criminal Procedure Act constituted an admission of involvement in fraudulent conduct, and her explanations for ignorance were not credible. The delays in prosecuting the review application were primarily due to the applicant's inactivity, but since the final steps were eventually...
- Citation
- [2010] ZALC 148
- Parties
- Applicant: Nkele Dolo; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Commissioner S Mthethwa N.O.; Respondent: Gold Reef City Casino
- Court
- Labour Court
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 19 October 2010
- Case Number
- JR 1655/07
- Procedural Posture
- Review Application / Judgment on Review and Rule 11 Dismissal Application
- Outcome
- The applicant's review application is dismissed. The third respondent's Rule 11 application is dismissed. The applicant is ordered to pay the third respondent's wasted costs incurred in bringing the Rule 11 application.
- Judges
- Lagrange
- Legal Topics
- Review of Arbitration Award, Misconduct Outside Workplace, Trust Relationship, Rule 11 Application, Condonation for Late Filing
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Nkele Dolo
Applicant
Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration
Respondent
Commissioner S Mthethwa N.O.
Respondent
Gold Reef City Casino
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review and Rule 11 Dismissal Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the arbitrator's award should be set aside on review.
- 2 Whether misconduct outside the workplace justified disciplinary action and redeployment.
- 3 Whether the applicant's statement under section 204 of the Criminal Procedure Act constituted an admission of guilt.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant's involvement in a fraudulent scheme, although not directed against her employer, undermined her integrity and trustworthiness, which are essential for her position involving cash handling. The arbitrator's decision to redeploy the applicant rather than reinstate her in her original position was reasonable and justified. The applicant's statement under section 204 of the Criminal Procedure Act constituted an admission of involvement in fraudulent conduct, and her explanations for ignorance were not credible. The delays in prosecuting the review application were primarily due to the applicant's inactivity, but since the final steps were eventually...
Court Disposition
The applicant's review application is dismissed. The third respondent's Rule 11 application is dismissed. The applicant is ordered to pay the third respondent's wasted costs incurred in bringing the Rule 11 application.
Orders
- The third respondent's Rule 11 application is dismissed.
- The applicant's review application is dismissed.
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