Mogodiseng v Commission for Conciliation, Meditation and Arbitration and Others (JR160/14) [2016] ZALCJHB 276 (3 March 2016)

Mogodiseng v Commission for Conciliation, Meditation and Arbitration and Others (JR160/14) [2016] ZALCJHB 276 (3 March 2016)

The court found that the arbitrator properly assessed the credibility of the parties and the probabilities of their respective versions regarding charges of dishonesty. The applicant's version was inconsistent and not put to key witnesses, while the evidence supported the arbitrator's findings that the applicant lied about his presence at the braai and instructed staff to sell Metrobus property. The arbitrator's conclusion was reasonable and not reviewable. The application for condonation was dismissed due to lack of prospects of success, and the review application was dismissed with costs.

Citation
[2016] ZALCJHB 276
Parties
Applicant: Ramohane Joel Mogodiseng; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Russel Moletsane N.O.; Respondent: Metrobus
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
3 March 2016
Case Number
JR160/14
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review and Condonation
Outcome
Application for condonation and review dismissed with costs.
Judges
Anton Steenkamp
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Review of Arbitration Award, Dishonesty in Employment, Condonation Application
Labour Law Unfair Dismissal Review of Arbitration Award Dishonesty in Employment Condonation Application

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 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ramohane Joel Mogodiseng

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Russel Moletsane N.O.

Respondent

Metrobus

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review and Condonation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitration award confirming the applicant's dismissal for dishonesty was reviewable under section 145 of the Labour Relations Act.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitrator's findings on charges 2 and 3 were conclusions that a reasonable arbitrator could reach.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's application for condonation for late filing of the review should be granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the arbitrator properly assessed the credibility of the parties and the probabilities of their respective versions regarding charges of dishonesty. The applicant's version was inconsistent and not put to key witnesses, while the evidence supported the arbitrator's findings that the applicant lied about his presence at the braai and instructed staff to sell Metrobus property. The arbitrator's conclusion was reasonable and not reviewable. The application for condonation was dismissed due to lack of prospects of success, and the review application was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application for condonation and review dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for condonation is dismissed.
  • The application for review is dismissed.