Evertrade v Kriel NO and Others (JR1054/07) [2008] ZALCJHB 29 (8 February 2008)

Evertrade v Kriel NO and Others (JR1054/07) [2008] ZALCJHB 29 (8 February 2008)

The court found that the third respondent was dismissed by the applicant, as her immediate referral to the CCMA and her testimony indicated a clear understanding of dismissal. The applicant's subsequent letters failed to address the dismissal allegation and were not satisfactorily explained. The arbitrator's finding...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2008] ZALCJHB 29
Parties
Applicant: Evertrade; Respondent: A Kriel N.O.; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Kim Botes
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 February 2008
Case Number
JR1054/07
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application for review dismissed.
Judges
Nieuwoudt
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Jurisdictional Fact, Review of Arbitration Award, Constructive Dismissal
Labour Law Unfair Dismissal Jurisdictional Fact Review of Arbitration Award Constructive Dismissal

Source-derived case record

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Evertrade

Applicant

A Kriel N.O.

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Kim Botes

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the third respondent was dismissed by the applicant.
  2. 2 Whether the dismissal, if established, was procedurally unfair.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator's finding of dismissal constituted a jurisdictional fact for review purposes.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the third respondent was dismissed by the applicant, as her immediate referral to the CCMA and her testimony indicated a clear understanding of dismissal. The applicant's subsequent letters failed to address the dismissal allegation and were not satisfactorily explained. The arbitrator's finding that a dismissal occurred was supported by the evidence, and the dismissal was procedurally unfair. The review application was dismissed as the jurisdictional fact of dismissal was objectively established.

Court Disposition

Application for review dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for review is dismissed.