Mthimunye v Nokonkoeng N.O and Another (JR2777/18) [2023] ZALCJHB 81 (24 March 2023)

Mthimunye v Nokonkoeng N.O and Another (JR2777/18) [2023] ZALCJHB 81 (24 March 2023)

The court found that the applicant failed to establish any grounds for review of the arbitrator's award. The allegations of procedural irregularity and failure to apply the audi alteram partem principle were vague and unsupported by the record, as the applicant was given ample opportunity to present his case and was assisted by a legal advisor. The arbitrator considered all significant evidence, and the procedure for dismissal due to poor work performance was properly followed, including investigation, evaluation, training, guidance, and counselling. The applicant's supplementary and replying affidavits did not raise any new or valid grounds for review. The test in Sidumo was not met, as...

Citation
[2023] ZALCJHB 81
Parties
Applicant: Siphiwe Simon Mthimunye; Respondent: Noko Nokonkoeng N.O.; Respondent: National Bargaining Council for the Chemical Industry SASOL Satellite Operations (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 March 2023
Case Number
JR2777/18
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application to review the arbitrator's award dismissed.
Judges
A. Snider
Legal Topics
Review of Arbitration Award, Poor Work Performance, Dismissal for Incapacity, Condonation Application
Labour Law Civil Procedure Review of Arbitration Award Poor Work Performance Dismissal for Incapacity Condonation Application

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Siphiwe Simon Mthimunye

Applicant

Noko Nokonkoeng N.O.

Respondent

National Bargaining Council for the Chemical Industry SASOL Satellite Operations (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrator's award is reviewable under section 145 of the Labour Relations Act.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant was denied the right to properly state his case, violating the audi alteram partem principle.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator failed to apply his mind to the relevant facts and legal principles.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to establish any grounds for review of the arbitrator's award. The allegations of procedural irregularity and failure to apply the audi alteram partem principle were vague and unsupported by the record, as the applicant was given ample opportunity to present his case and was assisted by a legal advisor. The arbitrator considered all significant evidence, and the procedure for dismissal due to poor work performance was properly followed, including investigation, evaluation, training, guidance, and counselling. The applicant's supplementary and replying affidavits did not raise any new or valid grounds for review. The test in Sidumo was not met, as...

Court Disposition

Application to review the arbitrator's award dismissed.

Orders

  • The application to review the arbitrator's award is dismissed.
  • There is no order as to costs.