Rustenburg Platinum Mines Ltd v Molefe and Others (J4204/00) [2001] ZALC 20; (2001) 22 ILJ 1406 (LC) (3 February 2001)

Rustenburg Platinum Mines Ltd v Molefe and Others (J4204/00) [2001] ZALC 20; (2001) 22 ILJ 1406 (LC) (3 February 2001)

The court held that while the Labour Relations Act limits the category of persons who may represent parties in arbitration, it does not prohibit an employee from referring a dispute on behalf of other identified employees, particularly where all are clearly listed and have signed the referral form. The court found that there was no prejudice to the applicant, as all employees were properly identified. The arbitrator was correct in joining the 2nd to 15th respondents and issuing the certificate of unresolved dispute. The application to review and set aside the arbitrator’s findings was dismissed with costs.

Citation
[2001] ZALC 20
Parties
Applicant: Rustenburg Platinum Mines Ltd; Respondent: R Molefe; Respondent: 14 Others; Respondent: LL Lebelo N.O.; Respondent: The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
3 February 2001
Case Number
J4204/00
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
E Revelas
Legal Topics
Representation in Ccma, Mass Dismissal Referral, Joinder of Parties, Conciliation Certificate, Section 158 Review
Labour Law Civil Procedure Representation in Ccma Mass Dismissal Referral Joinder of Parties Conciliation Certificate Section 158 Review

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

Rustenburg Platinum Mines Ltd

Applicant

R Molefe

Respondent

14 Others

Respondent

LL Lebelo N.O.

Respondent

The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the CCMA had jurisdiction to conciliate a dispute referred by the first respondent on behalf of himself and others.
  2. 2 Whether the commissioner was correct to join the 2nd to 15th respondents as parties to the dispute.
  3. 3 Whether the commissioner was entitled to issue a certificate of unresolved dispute under section 135(5) of the LRA when no conciliation took place.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that while the Labour Relations Act limits the category of persons who may represent parties in arbitration, it does not prohibit an employee from referring a dispute on behalf of other identified employees, particularly where all are clearly listed and have signed the referral form. The court found that there was no prejudice to the applicant, as all employees were properly identified. The arbitrator was correct in joining the 2nd to 15th respondents and issuing the certificate of unresolved dispute. The application to review and set aside the arbitrator’s findings was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application to review and set aside the arbitrator’s findings is dismissed.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of the respondents.