Fakude v Spoornet and Others (JR1327/06) [2010] ZALC 189 (9 December 2010)

Fakude v Spoornet and Others (JR1327/06) [2010] ZALC 189 (9 December 2010)

The court found that the applicant failed to discharge the onus of proving that his resignation amounted to constructive dismissal. The intolerable conditions cited by the applicant were not deliberately created by the respondent but arose from operational requirements and restructuring. The arbitrator considered all relevant facts and submissions and reached a reasonable conclusion that the resignation was not induced by intolerable conduct of the employer. The applicant's dissatisfaction stemmed from the transfer itself, not from any deliberate action by the respondent to make continued employment intolerable. There was no gross irregularity or failure to consider material evidence....

Citation
[2010] ZALC 189
Parties
Applicant: Stanley Jabulani Fakude; Respondent: Spoornet; Respondent: The Director of Transnet Bargaining Council; Respondent: Arbitrator L. Dreyer N.O.
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
9 December 2010
Case Number
JR1327/06
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application to review the arbitration award is dismissed.
Judges
Molahlehi
Legal Topics
Constructive Dismissal, Review of Arbitration Award, Onus of Proof, Reasonable Decision Maker Test
Labour Law Constructive Dismissal Review of Arbitration Award Onus of Proof Reasonable Decision Maker Test

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stanley Jabulani Fakude

Applicant

Spoornet

Respondent

The Director of Transnet Bargaining Council

Respondent

Arbitrator L. Dreyer N.O.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's resignation amounted to constructive dismissal as contemplated by section 186(1)(e) of the Labour Relations Act.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitrator committed gross irregularity or ignored material evidence in reaching the award.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitration award should be reviewed and set aside.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to discharge the onus of proving that his resignation amounted to constructive dismissal. The intolerable conditions cited by the applicant were not deliberately created by the respondent but arose from operational requirements and restructuring. The arbitrator considered all relevant facts and submissions and reached a reasonable conclusion that the resignation was not induced by intolerable conduct of the employer. The applicant's dissatisfaction stemmed from the transfer itself, not from any deliberate action by the respondent to make continued employment intolerable. There was no gross irregularity or failure to consider material evidence....

Court Disposition

Application to review the arbitration award is dismissed.

Orders

  • The applicant’s application to review the arbitration award issued on 15 April 2006 is dismissed.
  • There is no order as to costs.