Mphahlele and Another v Anglo Platinum Mines (Union Section) and Others (JR2287/11) [2015] ZALCJHB 458 (15 December 2015)

Mphahlele and Another v Anglo Platinum Mines (Union Section) and Others (JR2287/11) [2015] ZALCJHB 458 (15 December 2015)

The court found that the applicant was afforded a fair opportunity to compete for the promoted position and that the employer's decision to appoint another candidate was within its prerogative. The applicant failed to discharge the onus of proving unfair labour practice, as the evidence did not establish that the interview process was unfair or that the scoring was manipulated. The arbitrator's award was reasonable and not vitiated by any gross irregularity or misconception of the law. The review application was therefore dismissed.

Citation
[2015] ZALCJHB 458
Parties
Applicant: Matuku Mphahlele; Applicant: National Union of Mineworkers; Respondent: Anglo Platinum Mines (Union Section); Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Sam Alidzulwi Muvhango N.O.
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 December 2015
Case Number
JR2287/11
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
Review application dismissed with costs.
Judges
Baloyi
Legal Topics
Unfair Labour Practice, Promotion Dispute, Review of Arbitration Award, Employer Prerogative, Onus of Proof
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Labour Practice Promotion Dispute Review of Arbitration Award Employer Prerogative Onus of Proof

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Matuku Mphahlele

Applicant

National Union of Mineworkers

Applicant

Anglo Platinum Mines (Union Section)

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Sam Alidzulwi Muvhango N.O.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the employer committed an unfair labour practice by not appointing the applicant to the promoted position.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitration award was reviewable on the grounds of unreasonableness or gross irregularity.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant was afforded a fair opportunity to compete for the position.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant was afforded a fair opportunity to compete for the promoted position and that the employer's decision to appoint another candidate was within its prerogative. The applicant failed to discharge the onus of proving unfair labour practice, as the evidence did not establish that the interview process was unfair or that the scoring was manipulated. The arbitrator's award was reasonable and not vitiated by any gross irregularity or misconception of the law. The review application was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Review application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The review application is dismissed with costs.