Mapasa v Fidelity Cash Management (J5519/00) [2001] ZALC 78 (30 May 2001)

Mapasa v Fidelity Cash Management (J5519/00) [2001] ZALC 78 (30 May 2001)

The court found that the respondent failed to provide any substantive explanation for its absence at the CCMA arbitration and did not submit proof that its rescission application was being entertained by the CCMA. The respondent's affidavit was sparse and did not justify a stay of enforcement. Granting a stay solely on the basis of a pending rescission application would open the door to procedural abuse under the Labour Relations Act. Accordingly, the applicant is entitled to have the arbitration award made an order of court.

Citation
[2001] ZALC 78
Parties
Applicant: S.W. Mapasa; Respondent: Fidelity Cash Management
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 May 2001
Case Number
J5519/00
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application to Make Arbitration Award an Order of Court
Outcome
Application granted; arbitration award made an order of court.
Judges
E Revalas
Legal Topics
Section 158 1 C Application, Arbitration Award Enforcement, Unfair Dismissal, Procedural Fairness, Substantive Fairness
Labour Law Section 158 1 C Application Arbitration Award Enforcement Unfair Dismissal Procedural Fairness Substantive Fairness

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

S.W. Mapasa

Applicant

Fidelity Cash Management

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application to Make Arbitration Award an Order of Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitration award issued by the CCMA in favour of the applicant should be made an order of court under section 158(1)(c) of the Labour Relations Act.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's pending rescission application at the CCMA justifies a stay of enforcement of the award.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent failed to provide any substantive explanation for its absence at the CCMA arbitration and did not submit proof that its rescission application was being entertained by the CCMA. The respondent's affidavit was sparse and did not justify a stay of enforcement. Granting a stay solely on the basis of a pending rescission application would open the door to procedural abuse under the Labour Relations Act. Accordingly, the applicant is entitled to have the arbitration award made an order of court.

Court Disposition

Application granted; arbitration award made an order of court.

Orders

  • The arbitration award dated 10 October 2000 under case GA94516 is made an order of court.