Lebowa Platinum Mines Limited v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (J774/99) [2001] ZALC 56; [2002] 5 BLLR 429 (LC) (17 April 2001)

Lebowa Platinum Mines Limited v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (J774/99) [2001] ZALC 56; [2002] 5 BLLR 429 (LC) (17 April 2001)

The court found that Le Roux's absence constituted desertion and a repudiation of his employment contract. However, termination only occurs when the employer accepts the breach, which happened in this case. The arbitrator's finding that Le Roux was unaware of the absenteeism rule was contradicted by evidence showing he was familiar with the procedure. Le Roux failed to make a proper effort to report to the relevant authorities upon his return, and his conduct exempted the employer from the duty to conduct a disciplinary enquiry. The arbitrator's award was unsupported by substantial evidence and not reasonably justifiable. The failure to call a key witness further undermined Le Roux's...

Citation
[2001] ZALC 56
Parties
Applicant: Lebowa Platinum Mines Limited; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Mashego, M L N.O.; Respondent: Le Roux, M H J
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 April 2001
Case Number
J774/99
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
The arbitration award dated 26 November 1999 under Case No NP3260 is set aside.
Judges
Pienaar, A J
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Desertion, Disciplinary Enquiry, Condonation, Repudiation of Contract
Labour Law Unfair Dismissal Desertion Disciplinary Enquiry Condonation Repudiation of Contract

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lebowa Platinum Mines Limited

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Mashego, M L N.O.

Respondent

Le Roux, M H J

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the dismissal of Le Roux for desertion was substantively and procedurally fair.
  2. 2 Whether the employer was obliged to conduct a disciplinary enquiry upon Le Roux's return.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator's award was justifiable on the evidence presented.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Le Roux's absence constituted desertion and a repudiation of his employment contract. However, termination only occurs when the employer accepts the breach, which happened in this case. The arbitrator's finding that Le Roux was unaware of the absenteeism rule was contradicted by evidence showing he was familiar with the procedure. Le Roux failed to make a proper effort to report to the relevant authorities upon his return, and his conduct exempted the employer from the duty to conduct a disciplinary enquiry. The arbitrator's award was unsupported by substantial evidence and not reasonably justifiable. The failure to call a key witness further undermined Le Roux's...

Court Disposition

The arbitration award dated 26 November 1999 under Case No NP3260 is set aside.

Orders

  • The arbitration award of the Second Respondent is set aside in its entirety.
  • There is no order as to costs.