Gage Specialists (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation Mediation And Arbitration and Others (JR1266/08) [2010] ZALCJHB 20 (22 December 2010)
The court held that in the absence of any evidence from either the employer or the employee, the Commissioner could not have concluded that a dismissal had occurred. There was no record of agreement between the parties regarding the fact of dismissal, and neither party presented evidence to substantiate their...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2010] ZALCJHB 20
- Parties
- Applicant: Gage Specialists (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Commissioner Matthews Ramotshela; Respondent: Sylvester Zitha
- Court
- Labour Court Johannesburg
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Case Number
- JR1266/08
- Procedural Posture
- Review Application / Judgment
- Outcome
- Arbitration award reviewed and set aside; dispute referred to arbitration before a different Commissioner.
- Judges
- Coetzee
- Legal Topics
- Arbitration Review, Unfair Dismissal, Procedural Fairness, Burden of Proof
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Gage Specialists (Pty) Ltd
Applicant
Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration
Respondent
Commissioner Matthews Ramotshela
Respondent
Sylvester Zitha
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Commissioner erred by making an award in the absence of any evidence from either party.
- 2 Whether the Commissioner failed to guide the parties to present evidence on oath.
- 3 Whether the arbitration award was one that a reasonable Commissioner could have made.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that in the absence of any evidence from either the employer or the employee, the Commissioner could not have concluded that a dismissal had occurred. There was no record of agreement between the parties regarding the fact of dismissal, and neither party presented evidence to substantiate their claims. The award made by the Commissioner was therefore unreasonable and could not stand. The arbitration award was reviewed and set aside, and the dispute was referred for arbitration before a different Commissioner.
Court Disposition
Arbitration award reviewed and set aside; dispute referred to arbitration before a different Commissioner.
Orders
- The arbitration award in case number LP6863/07 dated 16 May 2008 is reviewed and set aside.
- The dispute between the parties is to be referred to arbitration before a Commissioner other than Second Respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
52 paragraphs
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
HELD AT BRAAMFONTEIN
CASE NO JR 1266/08
In the matter between:
GAGE SPECIALISTS (PTY) LTD
Applicant
and
COMMISSION FOR CONCILIATION, MEDIATION
AND ARBITRATION
First Respondent
COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS RAMOTSHELA Second Respondent
SYLVESTER ZITHA
Third Respondent
JUDGMENT
COETZEE AJ:
Introduction
1. Applicant seeks to have an arbitration award awarding the Employee compensation reviewed and set aside on the basis that no evidence was presented to the Commissioner and that the Commissioner, therefore, could not have made any finding.
The facts
2. According to the arbitration award, the Commissioner repeatedly advised the Employer representative of a failure to present any oral evidence, especially in the light of the Employee’s denial of the allegations levelled against him.
3. The Employer stated repeatedly that it was not calling any witnesses to substantiate its allegations of fairness relying upon a bundle of documents it wished to present to the Commissioner.
4. While the arbitration award is silent on this issue, the Employer contends that its representatives wished to hand up a bundle of documents containing the records of the disciplinary enquiry, but that the Commissioner refused to accept the documentation without the Employer leading any oral evidence.
5. The Commissioner recorded that the Employee also did not present any evidence.
6. The Commissioner in the absence of evidence by the Employer and the Employee held the dismissal to be unfair both substantively and procedurally.
7. Applicant seeks to review the arbitration award on two basis:
9.1 The Commissioner should have guided the parties to present evidence on oath, which he allegedly failed to do.
9.2 The Commissioner could not make any award in the absence of any evidence.
Analysis
8. A Commissioner may conduct the arbitration in a manner that the Commissioner considers appropriate in order to determine the dispute
fairly and quickly, but must deal with the substantial merits of the dispute with a minimum of legal formalities[1].
9. A dismissal is unfair if the Employer fails to prove that the reason for dismissal is a fair reason (in this case relating to conduct) and that the dismissal was effected in accordance with a fair procedure[2].
10. The Commissioner may, therefore, once it is established that there was a dismissal conclude that the dismissal was unfair if the Employer has failed to lead evidence to prove a fair reason and a fair procedure.
11. The Employer did not present any evidence that it dismissed the Employee, and if so for what reason.
12. The Employee also did not give any evidence that he was dismissed.
13. There is no record of any agreement between the parties that the Employer had dismissed the Employee.
14. In the absence of any evidence the Commissioner could not conclude the fact of a dismissal.
15. The award is one that a reasonable Commissioner could not have made.
Order
16. The arbitration award in case number LP6863/07 dated 16 May 2008 is reviewed and set aside. The dispute between the parties is to be referred to arbitration before a Commissioner other than Second Respondent.
____________________________
A J COETZEE
ACTING JUDGE OF THE LABOUR COURT
DATE OF HEARING:
22 DECEMBER 2010
DATE OF JUDGMENT:
22 DECEMBER 2010
APPEARANCES:
FOR APPLICANT:
RIKI ANDERSON
of Riki Anderson Attorneys
FOR THE RESPONDENT: NO APPEARANCE
[1] Section 138(1) of the Labour Relations Act
[2] Section 188(1) of the LRA