Mahlakoane v South African Revenue Service (JA118/13) [2018] ZALAC 1; [2018] 4 BLLR 337 (LAC); (2018) 39 ILJ 1034 (LAC) (25 January 2018)

Mahlakoane v South African Revenue Service (JA118/13) [2018] ZALAC 1; [2018] 4 BLLR 337 (LAC); (2018) 39 ILJ 1034 (LAC) (25 January 2018)

The Labour Appeal Court held that the principle of double jeopardy did not apply, as the charges in the second disciplinary hearing were materially different from those in the first. The first hearing addressed the appellant's continued receipt of social grants after employment, while the second focused on the forgery and uttering of SASSA letters. The evidence, including testimony from SASSA and the Special Investigation Unit, established that the letters relied upon by the appellant were forged and the police stamp was falsified. The appellant's version was contradicted by documentary evidence and the absence of any record of cancellation requests in 2006. The misconduct was serious,...

Citation
[2018] ZALAC 1
Parties
Appellant: Winnie Mahlakoane; Respondent: South African Revenue Service
Court
Labour Appeal Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 January 2018
Case Number
JA118/13
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Court Judgment Reviewing and Setting Aside CCMA Arbitration Award
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs. Labour Court's judgment upholding the dismissal confirmed.
Judges
Tlaletsi, Ndlovu, Coppin
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Double Jeopardy, Forgery, Disciplinary Procedure, Review of Arbitration Award
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Double Jeopardy Forgery Disciplinary Procedure Review of Arbitration Award

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

Parties

Winnie Mahlakoane

Appellant

South African Revenue Service

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Court Judgment Reviewing and Setting Aside CCMA Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the principle of double jeopardy precluded the employer from subjecting the employee to a second disciplinary hearing.
  2. 2 Whether the charges of misconduct in the second disciplinary hearing were proved on a balance of probabilities.
  3. 3 Whether the dismissal of the appellant was substantively fair.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Appeal Court held that the principle of double jeopardy did not apply, as the charges in the second disciplinary hearing were materially different from those in the first. The first hearing addressed the appellant's continued receipt of social grants after employment, while the second focused on the forgery and uttering of SASSA letters. The evidence, including testimony from SASSA and the Special Investigation Unit, established that the letters relied upon by the appellant were forged and the police stamp was falsified. The appellant's version was contradicted by documentary evidence and the absence of any record of cancellation requests in 2006. The misconduct was serious,...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs. Labour Court's judgment upholding the dismissal confirmed.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.
  • The order of the Labour Court is upheld.