Kwezi Group v Bond and Others (JR 35/08) [2010] ZALC 267 (3 February 2010)

Kwezi Group v Bond and Others (JR 35/08) [2010] ZALC 267 (3 February 2010)

The court found that the second respondent failed to properly apply the objective test for reasonable expectation as required by section 186(1)(b) of the LRA and relevant case law. The evidence showed that the applicant had repeatedly reduced the duration of the first respondent's fixed-term contracts due to poor performance and had clearly communicated that no further extensions would be granted. In these circumstances, a reasonable employee could not have expected renewal or permanent employment. The second respondent's failure to consider these facts amounted to a gross irregularity, rendering the arbitration award reviewable and unsustainable. The court set aside the award and...

Citation
[2010] ZALC 267
Parties
Applicant: Kwezi Group; Respondent: Barbara Bond; Respondent: Buti Zwane; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation Mediation & Arbitration
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
3 February 2010
Case Number
JR 35/08
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
The arbitration award is reviewed and set aside. The termination of the first respondent's employment does not constitute a dismissal under section 186(1)(b) of the LRA. Costs are awarded against the first respondent.
Judges
Nyathela AJ
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Fixed Term Contracts, Reasonable Expectation, Review of Arbitration Award, Gross Irregularity
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Fixed Term Contracts Reasonable Expectation Review of Arbitration Award Gross Irregularity

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

Parties

Kwezi Group

Applicant

Barbara Bond

Respondent

Buti Zwane

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation Mediation & Arbitration

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the termination of the first respondent's fixed-term contract constituted a dismissal under section 186(1)(b) of the LRA.
  2. 2 Whether the second respondent committed a gross irregularity in finding that the first respondent had a reasonable expectation of renewal.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitration award should be reviewed and set aside.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the second respondent failed to properly apply the objective test for reasonable expectation as required by section 186(1)(b) of the LRA and relevant case law. The evidence showed that the applicant had repeatedly reduced the duration of the first respondent's fixed-term contracts due to poor performance and had clearly communicated that no further extensions would be granted. In these circumstances, a reasonable employee could not have expected renewal or permanent employment. The second respondent's failure to consider these facts amounted to a gross irregularity, rendering the arbitration award reviewable and unsustainable. The court set aside the award and...

Court Disposition

The arbitration award is reviewed and set aside. The termination of the first respondent's employment does not constitute a dismissal under section 186(1)(b) of the LRA. Costs are awarded against the first respondent.

Orders

  • The arbitration award issued by the second respondent on 20 November 2007 under case number GAJB 300028-07 is reviewed and set aside.
  • The termination of first respondent’s employment on 31 August 2007 does not constitute a dismissal as contemplated in section 186(1)(b) of the LRA.