Jackson v De Beer NO and Others (D284/11) [2014] ZALCD 5 (5 March 2014)

Jackson v De Beer NO and Others (D284/11) [2014] ZALCD 5 (5 March 2014)

The court found that while there were procedural flaws in the selection and appointment process for the promotional post, these did not amount to substantive unfairness. The applicant, a white male, was from an overrepresented group in the rank, and the promotion of the fourth respondent advanced employment equity objectives. The evaluation and ratification panels breached procedural requirements under National Instruction 2/2008, but this did not justify setting aside the arbitration award. The applicant failed to prove that the first respondent committed any defect as defined in section 145 of the Labour Relations Act or that an unfair labour practice was committed by the third...

Citation
[2014] ZALCD 5
Parties
Applicant: J S Jackson; Respondent: L Williams de Beer N.O; Respondent: Safety and Security Sectoral Bargaining Council (SSSBC); Respondent: National Commissioner: South African Police Service; Respondent: A Draai
Court
Labour Court Durban
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 March 2014
Case Number
D284/11
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review Application After Arbitration Award
Outcome
Review application dismissed; condonation for late filing granted; no costs order.
Judges
Cele
Legal Topics
Unfair Labour Practice, Promotion Dispute, Employment Equity, Review of Arbitration Award, Condonation, Procedural Fairness
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Labour Practice Promotion Dispute Employment Equity Review of Arbitration Award Condonation Procedural Fairness

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

Parties

J S Jackson

Applicant

L Williams de Beer N.O

Respondent

Safety and Security Sectoral Bargaining Council (SSSBC)

Respondent

National Commissioner: South African Police Service

Respondent

A Draai

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review Application After Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitration award regarding the applicant's non-promotion was reviewable under section 145 of the Labour Relations Act.
  2. 2 Whether the selection and appointment process for the promotional post was procedurally and substantively unfair.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant was entitled to protected promotion and retrospective benefits.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that while there were procedural flaws in the selection and appointment process for the promotional post, these did not amount to substantive unfairness. The applicant, a white male, was from an overrepresented group in the rank, and the promotion of the fourth respondent advanced employment equity objectives. The evaluation and ratification panels breached procedural requirements under National Instruction 2/2008, but this did not justify setting aside the arbitration award. The applicant failed to prove that the first respondent committed any defect as defined in section 145 of the Labour Relations Act or that an unfair labour practice was committed by the third...

Court Disposition

Review application dismissed; condonation for late filing granted; no costs order.

Orders

  • Condonation for the late filing of the review application is granted.
  • The review application is dismissed.