Fidelity Springbok Security Services (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1275/01) [2006] ZALC 41 (7 March 2006)

Fidelity Springbok Security Services (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1275/01) [2006] ZALC 41 (7 March 2006)

The court found that the arbitrator had properly considered the evidence available and applied his mind to the issues at hand. The alleged misconduct by the third respondent was not proven on a balance of probabilities, and the damage to property was minimal. There was no evidence of threats or intent to hold management hostage. The arbitrator's decision was rational, justifiable, and not arbitrary. The grounds for review, namely gross irregularity and irrationality, were not established. The application to review and set aside the arbitration award was dismissed.

Citation
[2006] ZALC 41
Parties
Applicant: Fidelity Springbok Security Services (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Cronje NO; Respondent: Webisi Telford
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 March 2006
Case Number
JR1275/01
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
Cele
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Arbitration Review, Strike Action, Procedural Fairness
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Arbitration Review Strike Action Procedural Fairness

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fidelity Springbok Security Services (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Cronje NO

Respondent

Webisi Telford

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitration award issued by the second respondent was reviewable under section 145 of the Labour Relations Act.
  2. 2 Whether the dismissal of the third respondent was substantively and procedurally fair.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator committed a gross irregularity or made an irrational or unjustifiable decision.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the arbitrator had properly considered the evidence available and applied his mind to the issues at hand. The alleged misconduct by the third respondent was not proven on a balance of probabilities, and the damage to property was minimal. There was no evidence of threats or intent to hold management hostage. The arbitrator's decision was rational, justifiable, and not arbitrary. The grounds for review, namely gross irregularity and irrationality, were not established. The application to review and set aside the arbitration award was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application to review and set aside the arbitration award is dismissed with costs.