Moloantoa v CCMA and Others [2021] ZALCJHB 345 (31 May 2021)

Moloantoa v CCMA and Others [2021] ZALCJHB 345 (31 May 2021)

The Labour Court, bound by the latest Labour Appeal Court authority in SARS v CCMA-Kruger, held that Eskom's substitution of the disciplinary sanction imposed by its internal chairperson was ultra vires the negotiated disciplinary code, which did not authorize such substitution. Consequently, the dismissal of the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] ZALCJHB 345
Parties
Applicant: Mmatlou Maria Moloantoa; Respondent: CCMA; Respondent: Commissioner Themba Manganyi N.O.; Respondent: Eskom SOC Limited
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
31 May 2021
Case Number
JR 1281/19
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Opposed Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
The review application is granted. The arbitration award is reviewed and set aside. The applicant's dismissal is declared substantively unfair. Compensation is awarded in lieu of reinstatement.
Judges
GN Moshoana
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Disciplinary Code Interpretation, Ultra Vires, Compensation, Procedural Fairness
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Disciplinary Code Interpretation Ultra Vires Compensation Procedural Fairness

Source-derived case record

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 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mmatlou Maria Moloantoa

Applicant

CCMA

Respondent

Commissioner Themba Manganyi N.O.

Respondent

Eskom SOC Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Opposed Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an employer may lawfully substitute a disciplinary sanction imposed by an internal chairperson without express authority in the disciplinary code.
  2. 2 Whether such substitution renders the subsequent dismissal substantively and/or procedurally unfair.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is entitled to reinstatement or compensation as a remedy for unfair dismissal.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Court, bound by the latest Labour Appeal Court authority in SARS v CCMA-Kruger, held that Eskom's substitution of the disciplinary sanction imposed by its internal chairperson was ultra vires the negotiated disciplinary code, which did not authorize such substitution. Consequently, the dismissal of the applicant was substantively unfair, regardless of the underlying misconduct. The commissioner failed to consider whether Eskom was empowered to substitute the sanction, amounting to a reviewable irregularity. Although reinstatement is the primary remedy for unfair dismissal, the circumstances rendered continued employment intolerable, making compensation the appropriate relief....

Court Disposition

The review application is granted. The arbitration award is reviewed and set aside. The applicant's dismissal is declared substantively unfair. Compensation is awarded in lieu of reinstatement.

Orders

  • The late filing of the review application is condoned.
  • The award issued by Commissioner Manganyi dated 5 December 2018 under case number LP5082-18 is reviewed and set aside.