Herholdt v Nedbank Ltd (701/2012) [2013] ZASCA 97; 2013 (6) SA 224 (SCA); [2013] 11 BLLR 1074 (SCA); (2013) 34 ILJ 2795 (SCA) (5 September 2013)

Herholdt v Nedbank Ltd (701/2012) [2013] ZASCA 97; 2013 (6) SA 224 (SCA); [2013] 11 BLLR 1074 (SCA); (2013) 34 ILJ 2795 (SCA) (5 September 2013)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the Labour Court and Labour Appeal Court correctly set aside the CCMA arbitrator's award. The arbitrator had not misconceived the nature of the enquiry, but her conclusion that the appellant was not dishonest was not one that a reasonable decision-maker could reach on the evidence. The court reaffirmed that the grounds for review under section 145(2)(a) of the Labour Relations Act are narrow and must be interpreted in light of the constitutional standard of reasonableness as set out in Sidumo. Material errors of fact or law are only relevant if they render the outcome unreasonable. The court rejected the development of more generous review standards...

Citation
[2013] ZASCA 97
Parties
Appellant: Andre Herholdt; Respondent: Nedbank Limited; Amicus Curiae: Congress of South African Trade Unions
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 September 2013
Case Number
701/2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Appeal Court, Which Sat as Court of Appeal From the Labour Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
Nugent, Cachalia, Shongwe, Wallis, Swain
Legal Topics
Ccma Review, Gross Irregularity, Unreasonableness Test, Conflict of Interest, Dishonesty, Dismissal Dispute
Labour Law Civil Procedure Ccma Review Gross Irregularity Unreasonableness Test Conflict of Interest Dishonesty Dismissal Dispute

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andre Herholdt

Appellant

Nedbank Limited

Respondent

Congress of South African Trade Unions

Amicus Curiae

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Appeal Court, Which Sat as Court of Appeal From the Labour Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Labour Court and Labour Appeal Court correctly set aside the CCMA arbitrator's award on the basis of gross irregularity and unreasonableness.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitrator's failure to find dishonesty in the appellant's conduct was a decision that a reasonable decision-maker could reach.
  3. 3 Whether the grounds for review of CCMA awards have been unduly relaxed by the labour courts.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the Labour Court and Labour Appeal Court correctly set aside the CCMA arbitrator's award. The arbitrator had not misconceived the nature of the enquiry, but her conclusion that the appellant was not dishonest was not one that a reasonable decision-maker could reach on the evidence. The court reaffirmed that the grounds for review under section 145(2)(a) of the Labour Relations Act are narrow and must be interpreted in light of the constitutional standard of reasonableness as set out in Sidumo. Material errors of fact or law are only relevant if they render the outcome unreasonable. The court rejected the development of more generous review standards...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs, such costs to include those attendant upon the employment of two counsel.