Ngubo v South African Broadcasting Corporation and Others (Leave to Appeal) (JR2106/21) [2025] ZALCJHB 14 (20 January 2025)
The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The findings regarding dishonesty and the appropriateness of dismissal were supported by the evidence and the applicable standard of proof. The Commissioner’s decision was reasonable, and the applicant’s submissions...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] ZALCJHB 14
- Parties
- Applicant: Hamilton Ngubo; Respondent: South African Broadcasting Corporation; Respondent: The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Dan Pretorius N.O.
- Court
- Labour Court Johannesburg
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Case Number
- JR2106/21
- Procedural Posture
- Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment
- Outcome
- Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
- Judges
- M Meyerowitz
- Legal Topics
- Dishonesty in Employment, Burden of Proof, Dismissal for Misconduct, Costs in Labour Matters
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Hamilton Ngubo
Applicant
South African Broadcasting Corporation
Respondent
The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration
Respondent
Dan Pretorius N.O.
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant has reasonable prospects of success on appeal.
- 2 Whether the findings regarding dishonesty and dismissal were materially incorrect.
- 3 Whether the burden of proof was correctly applied.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The findings regarding dishonesty and the appropriateness of dismissal were supported by the evidence and the applicable standard of proof. The Commissioner’s decision was reasonable, and the applicant’s submissions did not reveal any material error. The applicant’s late submissions were condoned due to the brief delay, but his failure to apologise or seek condonation was deemed disrespectful, justifying an adverse costs order.
Court Disposition
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Orders
- The applicant’s application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
27 paragraphs
THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG
Not Reportable
case no: JR2106/21
In the matter between:
HAMILTON NGUBO
Applicant
and
SOUTH AFRICAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION First Respondent
THE COMMISSION FOR CONCILIATION,
Second Respondent
MEDIATION AND ARBITRATION
DAN PRETORIUS N.O.
Third Respondent
Decided in chambers: 20 January 2025
This judgment was handed down electronically by emailing a copy to the parties. The 20th of January 2025 is deemed to be the date of delivery of this judgment.
JUDGMENT: LEAVE TO APPEAL
MEYEROWITZ AJ
[1] This is an opposed application for leave to appeal, brought by the applicant (Mr Ngubo), against my judgment in this matter dated 18 September 2024.
[2] The facts and my reasoning in this matter are recorded in the above judgment and need not be repeated here. Mr Ngubo’s written submissions in support of his application for leave to appeal have not persuaded me that any material findings I made were incorrect, or that an appeal would have reasonable prospects of success.
[3] After considering all of the evidence, I was satisfied that Mr Ngubo had been dishonest with the investigators by not disclosing his conversation with Mr Hanarkan. I was not satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt but I was satisfied on a balance of probabilities. I only mentioned the criminal burden to emphasise that Mr Ngubo’s version, while plausible, was not the more likely version – I certainly did not shift or elevate the burden of proof.
[4] While I appreciate that not every act of dishonesty justifies dismissal, my view remains that the Commissioner acted reasonably when finding dismissal to have been an appropriate sanction. This is on the basis that dismissal should be a sensible operational response to risk management.
[5] The written submissions in this matter were late but the tardiness is hereby condoned because the delay was brief. However, the failure to apologise or seek condonation is disrespectful of this court and provides sufficient basis to depart from the norm that costs do not follow the result in labour matters.
[6] In the premises, I make the following order:
Order
1. The applicant’s application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.
Mark Meyerowitz
Acting Judge of the Labour Court of South Africa