Rabothatha v Metal And Engineering Industries Bargaining Council and Others (JR 3019/2012) [2015] ZALCJHB 106 (25 March 2015)

Rabothatha v Metal And Engineering Industries Bargaining Council and Others (JR 3019/2012) [2015] ZALCJHB 106 (25 March 2015)

The court held that the founding affidavit failed to set out any factual basis for the review of the arbitration award and did not reference the record of proceedings, rendering the application generic and unsupported. The applicant is bound by the grounds of review contained in the founding affidavit unless supplemented, which was not done. The court found that the applicant sought to have the court scrutinize the entire record to identify irregularities, which is not the court's function. The applicant failed to make out a case for review, and the application was dismissed. Furthermore, the court found that the applicant's conduct in filing the entire record and failing to motivate its...

Citation
[2015] ZALCJHB 106
Parties
Applicant: NUMSA obo Samuel Rabothatha; Respondent: Metal and Engineering Industries Bargaining Council; Respondent: Commissioner Tshepo Mashigo N.O.; Respondent: Norco Cables (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 March 2015
Case Number
JR 3019/2012
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review Application
Outcome
The review application is dismissed with costs on an attorney and own client scale awarded against the applicant.
Judges
Venter
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Review of Arbitration Award, Personal Knowledge of Deponent, Attorney and Own Client Costs
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Review of Arbitration Award Personal Knowledge of Deponent Attorney and Own Client Costs

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 Samuel Rabothatha

Applicant

Metal and Engineering Industries Bargaining Council

Respondent

Commissioner Tshepo Mashigo N.O.

Respondent

Norco Cables (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the founding affidavit in the review application is admissible despite the deponent lacking personal knowledge of the arbitration proceedings.
  2. 2 Whether the founding affidavit sets out a sufficient factual basis for the review of the arbitration award.
  3. 3 Whether the commissioner committed reviewable irregularities or misconduct in the arbitration award.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the founding affidavit failed to set out any factual basis for the review of the arbitration award and did not reference the record of proceedings, rendering the application generic and unsupported. The applicant is bound by the grounds of review contained in the founding affidavit unless supplemented, which was not done. The court found that the applicant sought to have the court scrutinize the entire record to identify irregularities, which is not the court's function. The applicant failed to make out a case for review, and the application was dismissed. Furthermore, the court found that the applicant's conduct in filing the entire record and failing to motivate its...

Court Disposition

The review application is dismissed with costs on an attorney and own client scale awarded against the applicant.

Orders

  • The review application is dismissed.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the third respondent's costs on an attorney and own client scale.