Metcash Trading Limited v Commission for Conciliation Mediationand Arbitration (CCMA)and Others (D1885/2001) [2003] ZALC 35 (24 April 2003)

Metcash Trading Limited v Commission for Conciliation Mediationand Arbitration (CCMA)and Others (D1885/2001) [2003] ZALC 35 (24 April 2003)

The court found that the CCMA commissioner erred in substituting his own sanction for that of the employer, given overwhelming evidence of serious dishonesty by the Fourth and Fifth Respondents. The employees were fully aware of the rule against misappropriation, the seriousness of shrinkage for the employer, and had attended meetings on the issue. The low value of the stolen item and long service did not justify overturning the dismissal, as theft fundamentally undermines the trust at the core of the employment relationship. The award was neither justifiable nor rational in light of the evidence, and the dismissal was both substantively and procedurally fair.

Citation
[2003] ZALC 35
Parties
Applicant: Metcash Trading Limited; Respondent: The Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA); Respondent: Commissioner A Ramdaw; Respondent: South African Commercial Catering and Allied Workers Union; Respondent: V Buthelezi; Respondent: H Mazibuko
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 April 2003
Case Number
D1885/2001
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of CCMA Arbitration Award
Outcome
The review application succeeded; the CCMA award was set aside and the dismissal of the Fourth and Fifth Respondents was upheld as substantively and procedurally fair.
Judges
N P Woodroffe
Legal Topics
Dismissal for Theft, Substantive Fairness, Procedural Fairness, Review of Arbitration Award
Labour Law Civil Procedure Dismissal for Theft Substantive Fairness Procedural Fairness 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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Metcash Trading Limited

Applicant

The Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA)

Respondent

Commissioner A Ramdaw

Respondent

South African Commercial Catering and Allied Workers Union

Respondent

V Buthelezi

Respondent

H Mazibuko

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of CCMA Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the CCMA commissioner was entitled to substitute his own sanction for that of the employer.
  2. 2 Whether the dismissal of the Fourth and Fifth Respondents for theft was substantively and procedurally fair.
  3. 3 Whether long service and low value of stolen goods justify overturning summary dismissal for dishonesty.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the CCMA commissioner erred in substituting his own sanction for that of the employer, given overwhelming evidence of serious dishonesty by the Fourth and Fifth Respondents. The employees were fully aware of the rule against misappropriation, the seriousness of shrinkage for the employer, and had attended meetings on the issue. The low value of the stolen item and long service did not justify overturning the dismissal, as theft fundamentally undermines the trust at the core of the employment relationship. The award was neither justifiable nor rational in light of the evidence, and the dismissal was both substantively and procedurally fair.

Court Disposition

The review application succeeded; the CCMA award was set aside and the dismissal of the Fourth and Fifth Respondents was upheld as substantively and procedurally fair.

Orders

  • The award of the Second Respondent dated 15 October 2001 is reviewed and set aside.
  • The dismissal of the Fourth and Fifth Respondents was substantively and procedurally fair.