Samsodien v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (C 484/10) [2011] ZALCCT 55 (23 June 2011)

Samsodien v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (C 484/10) [2011] ZALCCT 55 (23 June 2011)

The court found that the applicant was employed on a fixed term oral contract until 31 December 2010 and that there was no evidence of termination of the employment relationship by UNISA. The arbitrator correctly found that the applicant had not been dismissed within the meaning of section 186(1) of the Labour Relations Act. The applicant's reliance on section 186(1)(b) and (d) was misplaced, as she failed to prove termination or re-employment of other casual workers. The arbitrator's award was reasonable and not susceptible to review. The application for review was dismissed.

Citation
[2011] ZALCCT 55
Parties
Applicant: Jamillah Samsodien; Respondent: CCMA; Respondent: Craig Bosch N.O.; Respondent: UNISA
Court
Labour Court Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 June 2011
Case Number
C 484/10
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application for review dismissed.
Judges
Steenkamp
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Fixed Term Contract, Onus of Proof, Review of Arbitration Award
Labour Law Unfair Dismissal Fixed Term Contract Onus of Proof Review of Arbitration 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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jamillah Samsodien

Applicant

CCMA

Respondent

Craig Bosch N.O.

Respondent

UNISA

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was dismissed within the meaning of section 186(1) of the Labour Relations Act.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitrator's award was unreasonable and reviewable.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant discharged the onus to prove dismissal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant was employed on a fixed term oral contract until 31 December 2010 and that there was no evidence of termination of the employment relationship by UNISA. The arbitrator correctly found that the applicant had not been dismissed within the meaning of section 186(1) of the Labour Relations Act. The applicant's reliance on section 186(1)(b) and (d) was misplaced, as she failed to prove termination or re-employment of other casual workers. The arbitrator's award was reasonable and not susceptible to review. The application for review was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for review dismissed.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.