Metrorail (PRASA) v SATAWU obo Tshabalala and Others (JR483/13) [2015] ZALCJHB 422 (5 October 2015)

Metrorail (PRASA) v SATAWU obo Tshabalala and Others (JR483/13) [2015] ZALCJHB 422 (5 October 2015)

The Labour Court found that the arbitrator committed a gross irregularity by insisting on the existence of a written rule and failing to consider credible evidence of a tacit operational rule requiring ticket sales agents to record and safeguard ECD cash boxes. The evidence established that Tshabalala was aware of and had previously complied with this practice, and his failure to record and secure the ECD box constituted gross negligence. The arbitrator's approach to probabilities and credibility was flawed, and his conclusion that no misconduct occurred was unreasonable. The only reasonable outcome was that Tshabalala was guilty of gross negligence and his dismissal was substantively...

Citation
[2015] ZALCJHB 422
Parties
Applicant: Metrorail (PRASA); Respondent: SATAWU obo J Tshabalala; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: David Dibakwane N.O.
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 October 2015
Case Number
JR483/13
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of CCMA Arbitration Award
Outcome
Review application granted; arbitration award set aside and substituted with order that dismissal was substantively fair; no order as to costs.
Judges
S Snyman
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Gross Negligence, Review of Arbitration Award, Tacit Terms, Substantive Fairness
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Gross Negligence Review of Arbitration Award Tacit Terms 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 5 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Metrorail (PRASA)

Applicant

SATAWU obo J Tshabalala

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

David Dibakwane N.O.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of CCMA Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrator committed a gross irregularity in finding no rule existed requiring the recording and safeguarding of ECD cash boxes.
  2. 2 Whether the absence of a written rule negates the existence of a tacit operational rule.
  3. 3 Whether Tshabalala's conduct constituted gross negligence justifying dismissal.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Court found that the arbitrator committed a gross irregularity by insisting on the existence of a written rule and failing to consider credible evidence of a tacit operational rule requiring ticket sales agents to record and safeguard ECD cash boxes. The evidence established that Tshabalala was aware of and had previously complied with this practice, and his failure to record and secure the ECD box constituted gross negligence. The arbitrator's approach to probabilities and credibility was flawed, and his conclusion that no misconduct occurred was unreasonable. The only reasonable outcome was that Tshabalala was guilty of gross negligence and his dismissal was substantively...

Court Disposition

Review application granted; arbitration award set aside and substituted with order that dismissal was substantively fair; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The applicant’s review application is granted.
  • The arbitration award of the third respondent is reviewed and set aside.