Gololo v Simba (Pty) Ltd and Others (JR1689/17) [2019] ZALCJHB 72 (29 March 2019)

Gololo v Simba (Pty) Ltd and Others (JR1689/17) [2019] ZALCJHB 72 (29 March 2019)

The Labour Court found that the Commissioner had properly considered the evidence and the applicant's history of insolent and insubordinate behaviour. The applicant had received a valid final written warning and continued to act in a manner that seriously challenged the employer's authority. The Court held that the Commissioner's award was reasonable and fell within the band of reasonableness required by law. The applicant failed to demonstrate any valid basis for review under section 145 of the LRA, and her long service did not mitigate the seriousness of her misconduct. The review application was therefore dismissed.

Citation
[2019] ZALCJHB 72
Parties
Applicant: Elizabeth Gololo; Respondent: Simba (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Justice Santjie Mthombeni N.O.
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 March 2019
Case Number
JR1689/17
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of CCMA Arbitration Award
Outcome
Review application dismissed; arbitration award upheld.
Judges
Schensema
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Insubordination, Progressive Discipline, Arbitration Review
Labour Law Unfair Dismissal Insubordination Progressive Discipline Arbitration Review

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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Elizabeth Gololo

Applicant

Simba (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Justice Santjie Mthombeni N.O.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of CCMA Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Commissioner's arbitration award was susceptible to review under section 145 of the Labour Relations Act.
  2. 2 Whether the sanction of dismissal for insubordination and insolence was substantively fair.
  3. 3 Whether the Commissioner failed to consider conflicting evidence and mitigating factors.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Court found that the Commissioner had properly considered the evidence and the applicant's history of insolent and insubordinate behaviour. The applicant had received a valid final written warning and continued to act in a manner that seriously challenged the employer's authority. The Court held that the Commissioner's award was reasonable and fell within the band of reasonableness required by law. The applicant failed to demonstrate any valid basis for review under section 145 of the LRA, and her long service did not mitigate the seriousness of her misconduct. The review application was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Review application dismissed; arbitration award upheld.

Orders

  • The applicant's review application is dismissed.
  • Each party is to pay its own costs.