Molefe v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation & Arbitration Polokwane and Others (JR2356/17) [2021] ZALCJHB 203 (2 August 2021)

Molefe v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation & Arbitration Polokwane and Others (JR2356/17) [2021] ZALCJHB 203 (2 August 2021)

The court found that although the delay in filing the review application was not excessive, the applicant failed to provide a satisfactory and reasonable explanation for the period of inactivity between becoming aware of the award and taking action. The applicant's confusion and reliance on obtaining legal advice did not constitute sufficient cause for condonation. Furthermore, the applicant did not demonstrate prospects of success, as he failed to distinguish his case from that of another employee who was dismissed for the same offence, and the argument of inconsistent discipline was unsupported. The seriousness of the misconduct, namely fraud, justified dismissal, and length of service...

Citation
[2021] ZALCJHB 203
Parties
Applicant: Aubrey Molefe; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation & Arbitration Polokwane; Respondent: Commissioner Ntsepeng Benault Mookamedi NO; Respondent: Pick 'n Pay Retailers
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 August 2021
Case Number
JR2356/17
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application for Condonation and Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
Application for condonation dismissed; review application dismissed; no order as to costs.
Judges
Nsibanyoni
Legal Topics
Condonation, Unfair Dismissal, Review of Arbitration Award, Disciplinary Consistency, Fraud in Employment
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Unfair Dismissal Review of Arbitration Award Disciplinary Consistency Fraud in Employment

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Aubrey Molefe

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation & Arbitration Polokwane

Respondent

Commissioner Ntsepeng Benault Mookamedi NO

Respondent

Pick 'n Pay Retailers

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application for Condonation and Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has shown good cause for condonation of the late filing of the review application.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has prospects of success in the review of the arbitration award.
  3. 3 Whether the employer acted consistently in applying discipline for similar offences.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although the delay in filing the review application was not excessive, the applicant failed to provide a satisfactory and reasonable explanation for the period of inactivity between becoming aware of the award and taking action. The applicant's confusion and reliance on obtaining legal advice did not constitute sufficient cause for condonation. Furthermore, the applicant did not demonstrate prospects of success, as he failed to distinguish his case from that of another employee who was dismissed for the same offence, and the argument of inconsistent discipline was unsupported. The seriousness of the misconduct, namely fraud, justified dismissal, and length of service...

Court Disposition

Application for condonation dismissed; review application dismissed; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The condonation application is dismissed.
  • Consequently, the review application is dismissed.