Proctor and Gamble Manufacturing SA (Pty) Ltd and Another v Mokadi and Others (JR895/16) [2018] ZALCJHB 80 (2 February 2018)

Proctor and Gamble Manufacturing SA (Pty) Ltd and Another v Mokadi and Others (JR895/16) [2018] ZALCJHB 80 (2 February 2018)

The court found that the fourth respondent failed to apply his mind to the true issue before him and misconstrued the nature of the relationships between the parties. The evidence demonstrated that the relationship between the first applicant and the second respondent was an outsourcing of services, not a client and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] ZALCJHB 80
Parties
Applicant: Proctor and Gamble Manufacturing SA (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Workforce Group (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Aaron Mokadi and 40 Others; Respondent: Sodexo Southern Africa (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Dumisani Ngwenya N.O.
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 February 2018
Case Number
JR895/16
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
The arbitration award was reviewed and set aside. The first applicant is not the employer or deemed employer of the first respondents. The matter is referred back to the CCMA for a hearing de novo before a different commissioner. No order as to costs.
Judges
S July
Legal Topics
Temporary Employment Services, Deeming Provisions, Co Employer Liability, Outsourcing Agreements, Review of Arbitration Award
Labour Law Civil Procedure Temporary Employment Services Deeming Provisions Co Employer Liability Outsourcing Agreements Review of Arbitration Award

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Proctor and Gamble Manufacturing SA (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Workforce Group (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Aaron Mokadi and 40 Others

Respondent

Sodexo Southern Africa (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Dumisani Ngwenya N.O.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the fourth respondent correctly determined the employment relationship under section 198A and section 200B of the Labour Relations Act.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants are deemed employers of the first respondents under section 198A of the LRA.
  3. 3 Whether the second applicant and second respondent are co-employers under section 200B of the LRA.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the fourth respondent failed to apply his mind to the true issue before him and misconstrued the nature of the relationships between the parties. The evidence demonstrated that the relationship between the first applicant and the second respondent was an outsourcing of services, not a client and temporary employment service relationship as contemplated by section 198A of the LRA. The deeming provision in section 198A did not apply, and there was no factual basis for finding co-employer liability under section 200B. The fourth respondent's reasoning was irrational and unsupported by the evidence. Consequently, the arbitration award was reviewed and set aside, and the...

Court Disposition

The arbitration award was reviewed and set aside. The first applicant is not the employer or deemed employer of the first respondents. The matter is referred back to the CCMA for a hearing de novo before a different commissioner. No order as to costs.

Orders

  • The award under case number GAEK4688-15 dated 4 April 2016 made by the fourth respondent is reviewed and set aside.
  • The first applicant is not the employer and/or deemed employer of the first respondents.