Prestige Cosmetics Group (Pty) Ltd v Ceda NO and Others (JR1556/17) [2018] ZALCJHB 230 (20 June 2018)

Prestige Cosmetics Group (Pty) Ltd v Ceda NO and Others (JR1556/17) [2018] ZALCJHB 230 (20 June 2018)

The arbitrator failed to properly assess and evaluate the undisputed evidence presented by the applicant regarding the performance review sessions, counselling, and training provided to the third and fourth respondents. The arbitrator's finding that no hearing was held and that the dismissals were procedurally unfair was inconsistent with the evidence and the applicable legal principles governing poor work performance dismissals. The store's overall performance was irrelevant to the individual performance of the respondents. The disconnect between the evidence and the arbitrator's conclusion rendered the award unreasonable. Consequently, the arbitration award was reviewed and set aside,...

Citation
[2018] ZALCJHB 230
Parties
Applicant: Prestige Cosmetics Group (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Themba Ceda N.O.; Respondent: The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Amanda Sishi; Respondent: Tebogo Lekaba
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 June 2018
Case Number
JR1556/17
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
The arbitration award was reviewed and set aside. The matter was remitted to the CCMA for rehearing before a different commissioner.
Judges
Van Niekerk
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Review of Arbitration Award, Procedural Fairness, Poor Work Performance
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Review of Arbitration Award Procedural Fairness Poor Work Performance

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

Prestige Cosmetics Group (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Themba Ceda N.O.

Respondent

The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Amanda Sishi

Respondent

Tebogo Lekaba

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrator properly assessed the evidence regarding the dismissal of the third and fourth respondents.
  2. 2 Whether the dismissal of the third and fourth respondents was substantively and procedurally fair.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitration award should be reviewed and set aside.

Ratio Decidendi

The arbitrator failed to properly assess and evaluate the undisputed evidence presented by the applicant regarding the performance review sessions, counselling, and training provided to the third and fourth respondents. The arbitrator's finding that no hearing was held and that the dismissals were procedurally unfair was inconsistent with the evidence and the applicable legal principles governing poor work performance dismissals. The store's overall performance was irrelevant to the individual performance of the respondents. The disconnect between the evidence and the arbitrator's conclusion rendered the award unreasonable. Consequently, the arbitration award was reviewed and set aside,...

Court Disposition

The arbitration award was reviewed and set aside. The matter was remitted to the CCMA for rehearing before a different commissioner.

Orders

  • The arbitration award issued by the first respondent under case number GAJB 2181/17 on 4 July 2016 is reviewed and set aside.
  • The matter is remitted to the second respondent for a rehearing before a commissioner other than the first respondent.