Samson v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR2023/22) [2025] ZALCJHB 140 (12 March 2025)

Samson v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR2023/22) [2025] ZALCJHB 140 (12 March 2025)

The court found that none of the grounds for leave to appeal raised by the third respondent had merit. The evidence of prior engagement was considered and did not amount to a hearing. The applicant's workload was not reduced, and the applicant was under-resourced. The court took into account the onus borne by the applicant and found that she satisfied it. The disciplinary action taken by the third respondent was based on alleged negligence, which was not established on the evidence. The court held that the matter should have been dealt with as poor work performance rather than misconduct. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed as there was no reasonable prospect of...

Citation
[2025] ZALCJHB 140
Parties
Applicant: Cindi Alani Samson; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Mashego Mailmela N.O.; Respondent: Reach Summit (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 March 2025
Case Number
JR2023/22
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment on Review
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Judges
RN Daniels
Legal Topics
Unfair Labour Practice, Final Written Warning, Onus of Proof, Review of Arbitration Award
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Labour Practice Final Written Warning 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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cindi Alani Samson

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Mashego Mailmela N.O.

Respondent

Reach Summit (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment on Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the grounds for leave to appeal have reasonable prospects of success.
  2. 2 Whether the Labour Court erred in its findings regarding prior engagement before issuing the warning.
  3. 3 Whether the Labour Court disregarded evidence relating to staffing and workload.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that none of the grounds for leave to appeal raised by the third respondent had merit. The evidence of prior engagement was considered and did not amount to a hearing. The applicant's workload was not reduced, and the applicant was under-resourced. The court took into account the onus borne by the applicant and found that she satisfied it. The disciplinary action taken by the third respondent was based on alleged negligence, which was not established on the evidence. The court held that the matter should have been dealt with as poor work performance rather than misconduct. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed as there was no reasonable prospect of...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.