Sasol Mining (Pty) Ltd v Nggeleni and Others (JR 1595/08) [2010] ZALC 141; [2011] 4 BLLR 404 (LC) ; (2011) 32 ILJ 723 (LC) (1 October 2010)

Sasol Mining (Pty) Ltd v Nggeleni and Others (JR 1595/08) [2010] ZALC 141; [2011] 4 BLLR 404 (LC) ; (2011) 32 ILJ 723 (LC) (1 October 2010)

The court found that the commissioner failed to properly resolve the factual dispute regarding Mr. Mabe's residence and entitlement to a travel allowance. The commissioner did not assess the credibility or reliability of witnesses, nor did he consider the inherent probabilities of the competing versions. This failure constituted a gross irregularity in the conduct of the arbitration proceedings. The court held that the award may have been different had the commissioner properly acquitted himself. As the record did not permit a substitution of the award, the matter was remitted for rehearing before another commissioner.

Citation
[2010] ZALC 141
Parties
Applicant: Sasol Mining (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Commissioner M Nggeleni; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: UPUSA obo Moses Mabe
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 October 2010
Case Number
JR 1595/08
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
Arbitration award reviewed and set aside; matter remitted for rehearing before another commissioner; costs awarded against third respondent.
Judges
Van Niekerk
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Arbitration Review, Gross Irregularity, Credibility Assessment
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Arbitration Review Gross Irregularity Credibility Assessment

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sasol Mining (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Commissioner M Nggeleni

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

UPUSA obo Moses Mabe

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the commissioner committed a gross irregularity in the conduct of the arbitration proceedings.
  2. 2 Whether the commissioner properly resolved the factual dispute regarding Mr. Mabe's residence and entitlement to a travel allowance.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitration award should be set aside and the matter remitted for rehearing.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the commissioner failed to properly resolve the factual dispute regarding Mr. Mabe's residence and entitlement to a travel allowance. The commissioner did not assess the credibility or reliability of witnesses, nor did he consider the inherent probabilities of the competing versions. This failure constituted a gross irregularity in the conduct of the arbitration proceedings. The court held that the award may have been different had the commissioner properly acquitted himself. As the record did not permit a substitution of the award, the matter was remitted for rehearing before another commissioner.

Court Disposition

Arbitration award reviewed and set aside; matter remitted for rehearing before another commissioner; costs awarded against third respondent.

Orders

  • The arbitration award made by the first respondent on 29 May 2008 is reviewed and set aside.
  • The matter is referred to the CCMA for a rehearing before another commissioner.