Media Information and Technologies Sector Education and Training Authority (MICTSETA) v Weedon and Others (JR718/16) [2018] ZALCJHB 79 (6 February 2018)

Media Information and Technologies Sector Education and Training Authority (MICTSETA) v Weedon and Others (JR718/16) [2018] ZALCJHB 79 (6 February 2018)

The court found that the refusal to allow Gama to represent the applicant did not constitute a material irregularity affecting the reasonableness of the arbitration award. The applicant was represented by another employee, Mr Peele, who was afforded time to prepare and led all witnesses. The CCMA Rules do not entitle a party to representation by a specific employee, only by an employee of the employer. The third respondent explained the process to all parties, and the applicant was not denied a fair opportunity to present its case. The award issued by the third respondent was reasonable and within the bounds of what a reasonable commissioner could issue. All grounds for review were...

Citation
[2018] ZALCJHB 79
Parties
Applicant: Media Information and Technologies Sector Education and Training Authority (MICTSETA); Respondent: Lydia Weedon; Respondent: The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Mr Isaac Milanzi N.O.
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
6 February 2018
Case Number
JR718/16
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Opposed Review Application
Outcome
Application for review dismissed; costs awarded against the applicant.
Judges
GN Moshoana
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Arbitration Review, Representation at Ccma, Gross Irregularity, Reasonableness of Award
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Arbitration Review Representation at Ccma Gross Irregularity Reasonableness of 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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Media Information and Technologies Sector Education and Training Authority (MICTSETA)

Applicant

Lydia Weedon

Respondent

The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Mr Isaac Milanzi N.O.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Opposed Review Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the refusal to allow a specific employee (Gama) to represent the applicant at arbitration constituted a reviewable irregularity.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant was denied a fair opportunity to present and prepare its case at arbitration.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitration award was unreasonable and should be set aside.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the refusal to allow Gama to represent the applicant did not constitute a material irregularity affecting the reasonableness of the arbitration award. The applicant was represented by another employee, Mr Peele, who was afforded time to prepare and led all witnesses. The CCMA Rules do not entitle a party to representation by a specific employee, only by an employee of the employer. The third respondent explained the process to all parties, and the applicant was not denied a fair opportunity to present its case. The award issued by the third respondent was reasonable and within the bounds of what a reasonable commissioner could issue. All grounds for review were...

Court Disposition

Application for review dismissed; costs awarded against the applicant.

Orders

  • The application for review is hereby dismissed.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the costs.