Ethekwini Municipality v Chetty and Others (D761/08, D381/09) [2010] ZALCD 22 (5 February 2010)
The court found that the arbitrator failed to address the substantive issue of whether the refusal to grant Chetty a motor vehicle allowance constituted an unfair labour practice. The arbitrator's reasoning was limited to procedural matters regarding the authority to decide the application and did not consider whether Chetty met the requirements of the scheme. This omission amounted to a gross irregularity, rendering the award reviewable. The award was set aside and the matter referred back for determination by a different commissioner. The application to make the award an order of court failed as a consequence.
- Citation
- [2010] ZALCD 22
- Parties
- Applicant: Ethekwini Municipality; Respondent: M. Chetty; Respondent: IMATU; Respondent: Bonisile Kojane N.O.; Respondent: South African Local Government Bargaining Council
- Court
- Labour Court Durban
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 5 February 2010
- Case Number
- D761/08, D381/09
- Procedural Posture
- Review Application / Judgment on Review and Application to Make Award an Order of Court
- Outcome
- The arbitration award is reviewed and set aside. The matter is referred back to the Bargaining Council for determination by a different commissioner. No order as to costs.
- Judges
- Conradie AJ
- Legal Topics
- Unfair Labour Practice, Collective Agreement Interpretation, Review of Arbitration Award, Motor Vehicle Allowance, Section 145 Lra, Section 158 Lra
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Ethekwini Municipality
Applicant
M. Chetty
Respondent
IMATU
Respondent
Bonisile Kojane N.O.
Respondent
South African Local Government Bargaining Council
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review and Application to Make Award an Order of Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the arbitrator committed a gross irregularity in failing to address the alleged unfair labour practice.
- 2 Whether the arbitrator had jurisdiction to determine the application for a motor vehicle allowance.
- 3 Whether the refusal to grant the motor vehicle allowance constituted an unfair labour practice.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the arbitrator failed to address the substantive issue of whether the refusal to grant Chetty a motor vehicle allowance constituted an unfair labour practice. The arbitrator's reasoning was limited to procedural matters regarding the authority to decide the application and did not consider whether Chetty met the requirements of the scheme. This omission amounted to a gross irregularity, rendering the award reviewable. The award was set aside and the matter referred back for determination by a different commissioner. The application to make the award an order of court failed as a consequence.
Court Disposition
The arbitration award is reviewed and set aside. The matter is referred back to the Bargaining Council for determination by a different commissioner. No order as to costs.
Orders
- The award issued under case number EMD 030802 is reviewed and set aside.
- The matter is referred back to the Fourth Respondent for determination by a commissioner other than the Third Respondent.
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