Gage Specialists (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation Mediation And Arbitration and Others (JR1266/08) [2010] ZALCJHB 20 (22 December 2010)

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
Labour Law Civil Procedure 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.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

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

  1. 1 Whether the Commissioner erred by making an award in the absence of any evidence from either party.
  2. 2 Whether the Commissioner failed to guide the parties to present evidence on oath.
  3. 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.