Moloko v Absa Bank Limited (J898/00) [2001] ZALC 122 (6 August 2001)

Moloko v Absa Bank Limited (J898/00) [2001] ZALC 122 (6 August 2001)

The court found that the commissioner did not commit misconduct or a gross irregularity in refusing Absa Bank to reopen its case or in failing to assist in securing witnesses. Absa Bank had ample opportunity and resources to call its witnesses and issue subpoenas. The commissioner's finding that Mr Moloko did not exceed his mandate, or did so only insignificantly, was supported by evidence regarding the sufficiency of security and banking practice. The court held that the arbitration award was rational and justified, and there was no basis to interfere with the commissioner's decision. The application to review the award was dismissed with costs, and the award was made an order of court.

Citation
[2001] ZALC 122
Parties
Applicant: Obakeng Andrew Moloko; Respondent: Absa Bank Limited
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
6 August 2001
Case Number
J898/00
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application to review the arbitration award is dismissed with costs. The award is made an order of court.
Judges
A A Landman
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Review of Arbitration Award, Mandate Exceedance, Disciplinary Procedure, Banking Practices
Labour Law Banking and Finance Unfair Dismissal Review of Arbitration Award Mandate Exceedance Disciplinary Procedure Banking Practices

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Obakeng Andrew Moloko

Applicant

Absa Bank Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the commissioner committed misconduct or a gross irregularity by refusing Absa Bank to reopen its case to call additional witnesses.
  2. 2 Whether the commissioner failed to assist the parties in securing the attendance of a key witness, Ms Abrahams.
  3. 3 Whether the commissioner's finding that Mr Moloko did not exceed his mandate was rational and justified.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the commissioner did not commit misconduct or a gross irregularity in refusing Absa Bank to reopen its case or in failing to assist in securing witnesses. Absa Bank had ample opportunity and resources to call its witnesses and issue subpoenas. The commissioner's finding that Mr Moloko did not exceed his mandate, or did so only insignificantly, was supported by evidence regarding the sufficiency of security and banking practice. The court held that the arbitration award was rational and justified, and there was no basis to interfere with the commissioner's decision. The application to review the award was dismissed with costs, and the award was made an order of court.

Court Disposition

Application to review the arbitration award is dismissed with costs. The award is made an order of court.

Orders

  • The application to review the arbitration award is dismissed with costs.
  • The arbitration award is made an order of court.