Lingunuba v Phooko and Others (JR 2053/19) [2021] ZALCJHB 202 (28 July 2021)

Lingunuba v Phooko and Others (JR 2053/19) [2021] ZALCJHB 202 (28 July 2021)

The court found that the applicant's grounds for review were in substance grounds of appeal and did not meet the threshold for review. The evidence established that the applicant's user ID was used to issue fraudulent birth certificates and his explanations were unconvincing. Contradictions in witness testimony were minor and did not undermine the overall reliability of the evidence. The arbitrator's decision was reasonable and justified on the facts. The application for condonation was refused as the applicant failed to provide sufficient grounds. Accordingly, the review application was dismissed.

Citation
[2021] ZALCJHB 202
Parties
Applicant: Maanda Lingunuba; Respondent: Moleko Ephraim Phooko; Respondent: Minister of Home Affairs; Respondent: The GPSSBC
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 July 2021
Case Number
JR 2053/19
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application for review dismissed; condonation refused; no order as to costs.
Judges
G N Moshoana
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Review of Arbitration Award, Condonation, Gross Irregularity
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Review of Arbitration Award Condonation 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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Maanda Lingunuba

Applicant

Moleko Ephraim Phooko

Respondent

Minister of Home Affairs

Respondent

The GPSSBC

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitration award dismissing the applicant's unfair dismissal claim was reasonable.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant established grounds for review based on gross irregularity.
  3. 3 Whether condonation for late filing of the review application should be granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's grounds for review were in substance grounds of appeal and did not meet the threshold for review. The evidence established that the applicant's user ID was used to issue fraudulent birth certificates and his explanations were unconvincing. Contradictions in witness testimony were minor and did not undermine the overall reliability of the evidence. The arbitrator's decision was reasonable and justified on the facts. The application for condonation was refused as the applicant failed to provide sufficient grounds. Accordingly, the review application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for review dismissed; condonation refused; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The condonation application is refused.
  • The application for review is dismissed.