NUMSA obo Masipa v Go Suspensions And Axles (Pty) Ltd (JR3349/09) [2014] ZALCJHB 91 (26 March 2014)

NUMSA obo Masipa v Go Suspensions And Axles (Pty) Ltd (JR3349/09) [2014] ZALCJHB 91 (26 March 2014)

The court held that an arbitration award ordering reinstatement in favour of the applicant constitutes a fundamental constitutional right and should not be subject to prescription under the Prescription Act. The Labour Relations Act is designed with its own timeframes and condonation mechanisms, which are inconsistent with the application of the Prescription Act to unfair dismissal claims. The court distinguished between awards for compensation, which may prescribe, and awards for reinstatement, which are immune from prescription. The applicant's continuous tender of services and attempts to enforce the award further supported the view that the right to reinstatement should not be...

Citation
[2014] ZALCJHB 91
Parties
Applicant: NUMSA obo Welcome Masipa; Respondent: Go Suspensions And Axles (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Metal and Engineering Industries Bargaining Council; Respondent: Commissioner Bongani Khumalo
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 March 2014
Case Number
JR3349/09
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application to Make Arbitration Award an Order of Court Under Section 158(1)(c) of the LRA
Outcome
Application granted; arbitration award made an order of court.
Judges
Mthombeni
Legal Topics
Prescription Act Application, Arbitration Award Enforcement, Reinstatement, Unfair Dismissal, Section 158 1 C Lra
Labour Law Prescription Act Application Arbitration Award Enforcement Reinstatement Unfair Dismissal Section 158 1 C 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 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

NUMSA obo Welcome Masipa

Applicant

Go Suspensions And Axles (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Metal and Engineering Industries Bargaining Council

Respondent

Commissioner Bongani Khumalo

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application to Make Arbitration Award an Order of Court Under Section 158(1)(c) of the LRA

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an arbitration award ordering reinstatement constitutes a debt under the Prescription Act.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitration award has prescribed and is unenforceable.
  3. 3 Whether the Labour Court should grant an order making the arbitration award an order of court.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that an arbitration award ordering reinstatement in favour of the applicant constitutes a fundamental constitutional right and should not be subject to prescription under the Prescription Act. The Labour Relations Act is designed with its own timeframes and condonation mechanisms, which are inconsistent with the application of the Prescription Act to unfair dismissal claims. The court distinguished between awards for compensation, which may prescribe, and awards for reinstatement, which are immune from prescription. The applicant's continuous tender of services and attempts to enforce the award further supported the view that the right to reinstatement should not be...

Court Disposition

Application granted; arbitration award made an order of court.

Orders

  • The application in terms of Section 158(1)(c) is granted.
  • There is no order as to costs.