Mathews v South African Woodworkers Union (C 98/98) [1999] ZALC 20 (22 February 1999)

Mathews v South African Woodworkers Union (C 98/98) [1999] ZALC 20 (22 February 1999)

The court found that the applicant's conduct in receiving a settlement cheque made out to himself, withholding part of the funds, and accepting a gift from the employee was highly irregular and fraught with improbabilities. The applicant failed to follow standard union procedures, did not sign up Mr Dush as a member, and acted in a clandestine manner to avoid union oversight. The evidence indicated that the applicant attempted to defraud an employee who trusted him, and his explanations were not credible. The breakdown of trust was not limited to Mr Maart but affected the respondent as a whole, given its duty to protect members from exploitation. The court found no evidence of arbitrary...

Citation
[1999] ZALC 20
Parties
Applicant: Raymond Mathews; Respondent: The South African Woodworkers Union
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 February 1999
Case Number
C 98/98
Procedural Posture
Unfair Dismissal Application / Labour Court Trial
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
Revelas
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Breach of Trust, Misappropriation of Funds, Disciplinary Procedure, Arbitrary Discrimination
Labour Law Unfair Dismissal Breach of Trust Misappropriation of Funds Disciplinary Procedure Arbitrary Discrimination

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Raymond Mathews

Applicant

The South African Woodworkers Union

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Unfair Dismissal Application / Labour Court Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's dismissal was for a fair reason under the Labour Relations Act.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant was arbitrarily discriminated against by the respondent.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant committed misconduct by misappropriating an employee's funds and breaching trust.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's conduct in receiving a settlement cheque made out to himself, withholding part of the funds, and accepting a gift from the employee was highly irregular and fraught with improbabilities. The applicant failed to follow standard union procedures, did not sign up Mr Dush as a member, and acted in a clandestine manner to avoid union oversight. The evidence indicated that the applicant attempted to defraud an employee who trusted him, and his explanations were not credible. The breakdown of trust was not limited to Mr Maart but affected the respondent as a whole, given its duty to protect members from exploitation. The court found no evidence of arbitrary...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.