Innovation Maven (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (C976/2014) [2015] ZALCCT 64; (2016) 37 ILJ 465 (LC) (29 October 2015)

Innovation Maven (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (C976/2014) [2015] ZALCCT 64; (2016) 37 ILJ 465 (LC) (29 October 2015)

The commissioner’s conduct during the arbitration proceedings was such that she repeatedly assumed the role of leading evidence and cross-examining witnesses, thereby undermining the role of the parties’ representatives and failing to afford the parties a fair hearing. This conduct created a reasonable apprehension...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] ZALCCT 64
Parties
Applicant: Innovation Maven (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Commissioner Bella Goldman N.O; Respondent: Michelle Filippinetti
Court
Labour Court Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 October 2015
Case Number
C976/2014
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
Application to review and set aside the arbitration award is granted. The matter is remitted to the CCMA for rehearing before a different commissioner. Each party to bear its own costs.
Judges
Van Niekerk
Legal Topics
Constructive Dismissal, Arbitration Bias, Fair Hearing, Review of Arbitration Award
Labour Law Civil Procedure Constructive Dismissal Arbitration Bias Fair Hearing Review of Arbitration Award

Source-derived case record

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 6 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Innovation Maven (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Commissioner Bella Goldman N.O

Respondent

Michelle Filippinetti

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the commissioner failed to afford the parties a fair hearing during arbitration.
  2. 2 Whether the commissioner’s conduct created a reasonable apprehension of bias.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitration award should be set aside and the matter remitted for rehearing.

Ratio Decidendi

The commissioner’s conduct during the arbitration proceedings was such that she repeatedly assumed the role of leading evidence and cross-examining witnesses, thereby undermining the role of the parties’ representatives and failing to afford the parties a fair hearing. This conduct created a reasonable apprehension of bias and protracted the proceedings unnecessarily. The statutory and constitutional requirements for fair arbitration were not met. As a result, the arbitration award must be reviewed and set aside, and the matter remitted to the CCMA for rehearing before a different commissioner. Substitution of the award is not appropriate where a fair trial was denied, and each party...

Court Disposition

Application to review and set aside the arbitration award is granted. The matter is remitted to the CCMA for rehearing before a different commissioner. Each party to bear its own costs.

Orders

  • The arbitration award issued by the second respondent on 22 September 2014 is reviewed and set aside.
  • The matter is remitted to the first respondent for a fresh hearing before a commissioner other than the second respondent.