Monte Casino v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR 314/2011) [2012] ZALCJHB 171 (27 December 2012)

Monte Casino v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR 314/2011) [2012] ZALCJHB 171 (27 December 2012)

The court found that the applicant acted inconsistently in its disciplinary process by dismissing the employee for misconduct while another employee, Ms Tsitsi, received only a final written warning for similar conduct. The charges against both employees were essentially the same, and the employee showed remorse and pleaded guilty, whereas Ms Tsitsi did not. The court held that the failure to justify the inconsistent application of discipline rendered the dismissal unfair. The Commissioner’s conclusion was found to be reasonable and not irregular. However, the Commissioner failed to properly consider section 193 of the Labour Relations Act regarding reinstatement. The court determined...

Citation
[2012] ZALCJHB 171
Parties
Applicant: Monte Casino; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Commissioner Ntombela; Respondent: Tony Vincent Masilo
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
27 December 2012
Case Number
JR 314/2011
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
The application to review the arbitration award is dismissed with costs.
Judges
Molahlehi
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Disciplinary Consistency, Reinstatement, Arbitration Review, Progressive Discipline
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Disciplinary Consistency Reinstatement Arbitration Review Progressive Discipline

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Monte Casino

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Commissioner Ntombela

Respondent

Tony Vincent Masilo

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Commissioner failed to apply the legal principles governing consistency in disciplinary matters.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitration award was reviewable due to the alleged failure to consider section 193 of the Labour Relations Act regarding reinstatement.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant acted inconsistently in imposing different sanctions for similar misconduct.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant acted inconsistently in its disciplinary process by dismissing the employee for misconduct while another employee, Ms Tsitsi, received only a final written warning for similar conduct. The charges against both employees were essentially the same, and the employee showed remorse and pleaded guilty, whereas Ms Tsitsi did not. The court held that the failure to justify the inconsistent application of discipline rendered the dismissal unfair. The Commissioner’s conclusion was found to be reasonable and not irregular. However, the Commissioner failed to properly consider section 193 of the Labour Relations Act regarding reinstatement. The court determined...

Court Disposition

The application to review the arbitration award is dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The applicant’s application to review the arbitration award under case number GAJB 2727/10 is dismissed with costs.