Masingo v CCMA and Others (JR 1742/15) [2016] ZALCJHB 259 (21 June 2016)

Masingo v CCMA and Others (JR 1742/15) [2016] ZALCJHB 259 (21 June 2016)

The court found that the commissioner committed misconduct by holding private discussions with the third respondent's representative without informing the applicant, thereby compromising the fairness of the proceedings. The commissioner failed to consider the applicant's evidence regarding standard procedure and the confirmation of payment by Mclaren. The applicant was not allowed to call witnesses or fully present his case. The evidence showed that the applicant followed established procedures and was not negligent, as the payment was confirmed in the bank account before goods were released. The subsequent reversal of payment was not foreseeable by the applicant, and there was no...

Citation
[2016] ZALCJHB 259
Parties
Applicant: Masigo Masigo; Respondent: CCMA; Respondent: Commissioner L Shear; Respondent: Chipbase Northriding/Iliad Africa Trading (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
21 June 2016
Case Number
JR 1742/15
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
The review application is granted. The arbitration award is set aside. The dismissal of the applicant is declared substantively unfair. The applicant is reinstated from the date of dismissal without loss of benefits.
Judges
Moshoana
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Arbitration Review, Gross Negligence, Reinstatement Remedy
Labour Law Unfair Dismissal Arbitration Review Gross Negligence Reinstatement Remedy

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

Parties

Masigo Masigo

Applicant

CCMA

Respondent

Commissioner L Shear

Respondent

Chipbase Northriding/Iliad Africa Trading (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the commissioner committed misconduct during the arbitration proceedings.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's dismissal was substantively fair.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant was guilty of gross negligence as alleged by the employer.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the commissioner committed misconduct by holding private discussions with the third respondent's representative without informing the applicant, thereby compromising the fairness of the proceedings. The commissioner failed to consider the applicant's evidence regarding standard procedure and the confirmation of payment by Mclaren. The applicant was not allowed to call witnesses or fully present his case. The evidence showed that the applicant followed established procedures and was not negligent, as the payment was confirmed in the bank account before goods were released. The subsequent reversal of payment was not foreseeable by the applicant, and there was no...

Court Disposition

The review application is granted. The arbitration award is set aside. The dismissal of the applicant is declared substantively unfair. The applicant is reinstated from the date of dismissal without loss of benefits.

Orders

  • The award issued by commissioner Shear is reviewed and set aside.
  • The dismissal of the applicant is substantively unfair.