Rand Water Board v Commission for Conciliation Mediation And Arbitration and Others (JR979/03) [2007] ZALCJHB 23 (12 November 2007)

Rand Water Board v Commission for Conciliation Mediation And Arbitration and Others (JR979/03) [2007] ZALCJHB 23 (12 November 2007)

The court found that the delay in filing the review application was minimal and adequately explained, and condonation was granted. The applicant was not at fault for the incomplete record, as the CCMA failed to provide a proper recording and did not facilitate reconstruction despite repeated requests. The third respondent did not testify during the arbitration, and the commissioner relied on an affidavit attached to heads of argument that was not served on the applicant. This constituted a gross irregularity. The points in limine raised by the third respondent were dismissed. The arbitration award was reviewed and set aside, and the dispute was referred back to the CCMA to be heard by a...

Citation
[2007] ZALCJHB 23
Parties
Applicant: Rand Water Board; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Mansingh, Roshnee; Respondent: Langeni Sindiso
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 November 2007
Case Number
JR 979/03
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
Application for review granted; arbitration award set aside; dispute referred back to CCMA for rehearing before a different commissioner; costs awarded against first and second respondents.
Judges
Molahlehi
Legal Topics
Review of Arbitration Award, Condonation, Record of Proceedings, Costs Award
Labour Law Civil Procedure Review of Arbitration Award Condonation Record of Proceedings Costs Award

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rand Water Board

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Mansingh, Roshnee

Respondent

Langeni Sindiso

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the late filing of the review application should be condoned.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's failure to provide a complete record of the arbitration proceedings is fatal to the review.
  3. 3 Whether the commissioner committed a gross irregularity in relying on evidence not properly before her.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the delay in filing the review application was minimal and adequately explained, and condonation was granted. The applicant was not at fault for the incomplete record, as the CCMA failed to provide a proper recording and did not facilitate reconstruction despite repeated requests. The third respondent did not testify during the arbitration, and the commissioner relied on an affidavit attached to heads of argument that was not served on the applicant. This constituted a gross irregularity. The points in limine raised by the third respondent were dismissed. The arbitration award was reviewed and set aside, and the dispute was referred back to the CCMA to be heard by a...

Court Disposition

Application for review granted; arbitration award set aside; dispute referred back to CCMA for rehearing before a different commissioner; costs awarded against first and second respondents.

Orders

  • The points in limine raised by the third respondent are dismissed.
  • The arbitration award issued by the second respondent under the auspices of the first respondent on 22 May 2003, under case number GA 216063/03 is reviewed and set aside.