Msomi v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (D694/05) [2007] ZALC 189 (19 March 2007)

Msomi v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (D694/05) [2007] ZALC 189 (19 March 2007)

The court found that the arbitrator's reasoning was based on the evidence presented. The applicant had admitted to unauthorised absence and had previously been warned about such conduct. The employer was not required to issue further written warnings for repeated offences, even if previous warnings had expired. The applicant was aware of the consequences of his actions. None of the grounds advanced by the applicant justified setting aside the arbitration award. The review application was therefore dismissed.

Citation
[2007] ZALC 189
Parties
Applicant: Thokozani Michael Msomi; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Nhlanhla Mathe; Respondent: South African Revenue Services
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 March 2007
Case Number
D694/05
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application for review dismissed.
Judges
Pillay D
Legal Topics
Review of Arbitration Award, Absenteeism, Disciplinary Procedure, Section 145 Lra
Labour Law Civil Procedure Review of Arbitration Award Absenteeism Disciplinary Procedure Section 145 Lra

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thokozani Michael Msomi

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Nhlanhla Mathe

Respondent

South African Revenue Services

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitration award should be reviewed and set aside under section 145 of the Labour Relations Act.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's dismissal for absenteeism was procedurally and substantively fair.
  3. 3 Whether the expiry of a previous warning precluded dismissal for repeated absenteeism.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the arbitrator's reasoning was based on the evidence presented. The applicant had admitted to unauthorised absence and had previously been warned about such conduct. The employer was not required to issue further written warnings for repeated offences, even if previous warnings had expired. The applicant was aware of the consequences of his actions. None of the grounds advanced by the applicant justified setting aside the arbitration award. The review application was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for review dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for review is dismissed.