Mhlauli v Mangosuthu University of Technology and Others (D144/14) [2015] ZALCD 45 (31 July 2015)

Mhlauli v Mangosuthu University of Technology and Others (D144/14) [2015] ZALCD 45 (31 July 2015)

The Labour Court found that the commissioner committed gross irregularity in the conduct of the arbitration proceedings by failing to properly assess the procedural fairness of the applicant's dismissal. The applicant was denied sufficient time to respond to the notice of intention to suspend, was not provided with requested documents, was not given an opportunity to mitigate before dismissal, and was denied the right to appeal as stipulated in the employer's disciplinary code. The court held that, while the applicant was guilty of three counts of gross misconduct and the dismissal was substantively fair, the dismissal was procedurally unfair. The numerical majority of acquittals did not...

Citation
[2015] ZALCD 45
Parties
Applicant: Dr Bhelekazi Mhlauli; Respondent: Mangosuthu University of Technology; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation Mediation Arbitration; Respondent: Commissioner Bess Pillemer
Court
Labour Court Durban
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
31 July 2015
Case Number
D144/14
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
The arbitration award was reviewed and set aside to the extent that the dismissal was procedurally unfair. The applicant's dismissal was substantively fair but procedurally unfair.
Judges
Cele
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Procedural Fairness, Insubordination, Disciplinary Procedure, Compensation for Unfair Dismissal
Labour Law Unfair Dismissal Procedural Fairness Insubordination Disciplinary Procedure Compensation for Unfair Dismissal

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

Parties

Dr Bhelekazi Mhlauli

Applicant

Mangosuthu University of Technology

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation Mediation Arbitration

Respondent

Commissioner Bess Pillemer

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitration award confirming the applicant's dismissal was reasonable and rational.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's dismissal was substantively and procedurally fair.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant was denied a fair opportunity to respond to disciplinary charges and to mitigate before dismissal.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Court found that the commissioner committed gross irregularity in the conduct of the arbitration proceedings by failing to properly assess the procedural fairness of the applicant's dismissal. The applicant was denied sufficient time to respond to the notice of intention to suspend, was not provided with requested documents, was not given an opportunity to mitigate before dismissal, and was denied the right to appeal as stipulated in the employer's disciplinary code. The court held that, while the applicant was guilty of three counts of gross misconduct and the dismissal was substantively fair, the dismissal was procedurally unfair. The numerical majority of acquittals did not...

Court Disposition

The arbitration award was reviewed and set aside to the extent that the dismissal was procedurally unfair. The applicant's dismissal was substantively fair but procedurally unfair.

Orders

  • The arbitration award is reviewed and set aside only to the extent that the dismissal of the applicant was procedurally unfair.
  • The first respondent is ordered to compensate the applicant in an amount equivalent to four months of her salary at the date of dismissal, payable within twenty days of the order.