Meyer v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Another (C937/00) [2001] ZALC 192; [2002] 2 BLLR 186 (LC); (2002) 23 ILJ 154 (LC) (29 October 2001)

Meyer v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Another (C937/00) [2001] ZALC 192; [2002] 2 BLLR 186 (LC); (2002) 23 ILJ 154 (LC) (29 October 2001)

The Labour Court found that section 138(7) of the Labour Relations Act was not complied with, as no signed arbitration award was issued or filed with the Registrar, and no extension was sought under section 138(8). The absence of a signed award means there is no valid award, and substantial compliance cannot be invoked where there is a total failure to comply. The unsigned document is a nullity and cannot have legal effect. The matter must be referred back to the CCMA for a hearing de novo. The Court further held that, due to the unusual circumstances and the failure of the CCMA to ensure compliance, an award of costs against the CCMA was justified as a mark of displeasure.

Citation
[2001] ZALC 192
Parties
Applicant: C F Meyer; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Alex Twigg
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 October 2001
Case Number
C937/00
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
The unsigned arbitration award is declared a nullity; the matter is referred back to the CCMA for a hearing de novo; costs are awarded against the CCMA.
Judges
PillermER
Legal Topics
Arbitration Award Validity, Review of Ccma Award, Procedural Irregularity, Substantial Compliance, Costs Award Against Ccma
Labour Law Civil Procedure Arbitration Award Validity Review of Ccma Award Procedural Irregularity Substantial Compliance Costs Award Against Ccma

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C F Meyer

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Alex Twigg

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an unsigned arbitration award issued by the CCMA is valid and has legal effect.
  2. 2 Whether the failure to comply with section 138(7) of the Labour Relations Act renders the award a nullity.
  3. 3 Whether the matter should be referred back to the CCMA for a hearing de novo.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Court found that section 138(7) of the Labour Relations Act was not complied with, as no signed arbitration award was issued or filed with the Registrar, and no extension was sought under section 138(8). The absence of a signed award means there is no valid award, and substantial compliance cannot be invoked where there is a total failure to comply. The unsigned document is a nullity and cannot have legal effect. The matter must be referred back to the CCMA for a hearing de novo. The Court further held that, due to the unusual circumstances and the failure of the CCMA to ensure compliance, an award of costs against the CCMA was justified as a mark of displeasure.

Court Disposition

The unsigned arbitration award is declared a nullity; the matter is referred back to the CCMA for a hearing de novo; costs are awarded against the CCMA.

Orders

  • The unsigned document purporting to be an award of the second respondent is declared to be a nullity.
  • The matter is referred back to the first respondent to be heard de novo.