Express Personel Services v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (D806/08) [2010] ZALC 45 (15 March 2010)

Express Personel Services v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (D806/08) [2010] ZALC 45 (15 March 2010)

The application for review failed because the applicant did not plead specific facts or law to demonstrate a defect in the commissioner's award as required by section 145 of the Labour Relations Act. The commissioner’s finding of procedural unfairness was reasonable, as the dismissal was effected by a single telephone call without any attempt at fair procedure, in disregard of the third respondent’s dignity and rights. The compensation awarded was not excessive and was consistent with precedent. The decision reached by the commissioner was one that a reasonable decision maker could have reached.

Citation
[2010] ZALC 45
Parties
Applicant: Express Personnel Services; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Comm G. Gertenbach; Respondent: G. Baliram
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 March 2010
Case Number
D806/08
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application to review and set aside the arbitration award is dismissed.
Judges
Cele
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Procedural Fairness, Compensation Award, Review of Arbitration, Termination for Incapacity
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Procedural Fairness Compensation Award Review of Arbitration Termination for Incapacity

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Express Personnel Services

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Comm G. Gertenbach

Respondent

G. Baliram

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitration award issued by the commissioner should be reviewed and set aside under section 145 of the Labour Relations Act.
  2. 2 Whether the dismissal of the third respondent was procedurally fair.
  3. 3 Whether the compensation awarded was appropriate given the circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The application for review failed because the applicant did not plead specific facts or law to demonstrate a defect in the commissioner's award as required by section 145 of the Labour Relations Act. The commissioner’s finding of procedural unfairness was reasonable, as the dismissal was effected by a single telephone call without any attempt at fair procedure, in disregard of the third respondent’s dignity and rights. The compensation awarded was not excessive and was consistent with precedent. The decision reached by the commissioner was one that a reasonable decision maker could have reached.

Court Disposition

Application to review and set aside the arbitration award is dismissed.

Orders

  • The application to review and set aside the arbitration award dated 27 August 2008 is dismissed.
  • No costs order is made.