SACCAWU obo Molefe v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1493/07) [2010] ZALC 235 (19 March 2010)

SACCAWU obo Molefe v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1493/07) [2010] ZALC 235 (19 March 2010)

The court found that the arbitrator had fairly outlined and properly evaluated the evidential material before him. The criticisms raised regarding the credibility of certain witnesses and the consideration of procedural fairness were not sufficient to undermine the principal thrust of the arbitrator's evaluation. The arbitrator's conclusions were reasonable and justifiable in relation to the evidence as a whole. The applicant failed to establish a good basis for the review and setting aside of the award.

Citation
[2010] ZALC 235
Parties
Applicant: SACCAWU obo Rebecca Molefe; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Commissioner TJ Sekhabisa; Respondent: Shoprite Checkers
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 March 2010
Case Number
JR1493/07
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs awarded against the applicant.
Judges
KS Tip
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Arbitration Review, Procedural Fairness, Substantive Fairness
Labour Law Unfair Dismissal Arbitration Review Procedural Fairness Substantive Fairness

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SACCAWU obo Rebecca Molefe

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Commissioner TJ Sekhabisa

Respondent

Shoprite Checkers

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrator's award upholding the dismissal of Ms Molefe was reasonable and justifiable.
  2. 2 Whether the dismissal of Ms Molefe was substantively and procedurally fair.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator failed to properly evaluate the evidentiary material and legal principles.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the arbitrator had fairly outlined and properly evaluated the evidential material before him. The criticisms raised regarding the credibility of certain witnesses and the consideration of procedural fairness were not sufficient to undermine the principal thrust of the arbitrator's evaluation. The arbitrator's conclusions were reasonable and justifiable in relation to the evidence as a whole. The applicant failed to establish a good basis for the review and setting aside of the award.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs awarded against the applicant.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of the third respondent.