Keerom Casa Hotel v Heinrichs (C85/98) [1998] ZALC 41 (25 June 1998)

Keerom Casa Hotel v Heinrichs (C85/98) [1998] ZALC 41 (25 June 1998)

The court found that the commissioner applied the wrong test in refusing the postponement, focusing on exceptional circumstances rather than justice and fairness. The commissioner failed to consider whether a postponement would prejudice the CCMA or the employee and whether such prejudice could be alleviated. The applicant was not at fault for being unable to summon witnesses on short notice after the employee disclosed her case during conciliation immediately preceding arbitration. The refusal to grant a postponement constituted a gross irregularity and a failure to comply with the rules of audi alteram partem. As a result, the arbitration award was set aside and the matter was remitted...

Citation
[1998] ZALC 41
Parties
Applicant: Keerom Casa Hotel; Respondent: M C Heinrichs
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 June 1998
Case Number
C85/98
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application for Condonation and Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
Application for condonation granted; arbitration award set aside; matter remitted for re-arbitration before a different commissioner; no order as to costs.
Judges
A A Landman
Legal Topics
Condonation of Late Filing, Gross Irregularity, Postponement in Arbitration, Unfair Dismissal, Audi Alteram Partem
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation of Late Filing Gross Irregularity Postponement in Arbitration Unfair Dismissal Audi Alteram Partem

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Keerom Casa Hotel

Applicant

M C Heinrichs

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application for Condonation and Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the late filing of the review application should be condoned.
  2. 2 Whether the commissioner committed a gross irregularity by refusing a postponement to call further witnesses.
  3. 3 Whether the refusal of postponement prejudiced the applicant's right to a fair hearing.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the commissioner applied the wrong test in refusing the postponement, focusing on exceptional circumstances rather than justice and fairness. The commissioner failed to consider whether a postponement would prejudice the CCMA or the employee and whether such prejudice could be alleviated. The applicant was not at fault for being unable to summon witnesses on short notice after the employee disclosed her case during conciliation immediately preceding arbitration. The refusal to grant a postponement constituted a gross irregularity and a failure to comply with the rules of audi alteram partem. As a result, the arbitration award was set aside and the matter was remitted...

Court Disposition

Application for condonation granted; arbitration award set aside; matter remitted for re-arbitration before a different commissioner; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The late application is condoned.
  • The award of the second respondent dated 6 February 1998 is reviewed and set aside.