SATAWU and Another v Arivia (Pty) Ltd t/a Arivia.Com and Others (JR1254/09) [2010] ZALCJHB 29 (10 September 2010)

SATAWU and Another v Arivia (Pty) Ltd t/a Arivia.Com and Others (JR1254/09) [2010] ZALCJHB 29 (10 September 2010)

The court found that the arbitrator did not commit any gross irregularity in the conduct of the proceedings. The arbitrator properly excluded irrelevant evidence and focused on the misconduct charge, namely insolence, which was substantiated by the evidence. The arbitrator applied the correct legal standard, exercised his own sense of fairness, and provided detailed reasons for his findings. The omission of certain witness testimony was justified as immaterial to the central issue of misconduct. The arbitrator's reference to 'gross' insolence was not a material irregularity, and the award was reasonable and supported by the facts. The applicants failed to establish any basis for review...

Citation
[2010] ZALCJHB 29
Parties
Applicant: SATAWU; Applicant: Penny Mkhize; Respondent: Arivia (Pty) Ltd t/a Arivia.Com; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Dumisane Ngwenya N.O
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 September 2010
Case Number
JR1254/09
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
Review application dismissed with costs.
Judges
Bhoola
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Insolence, Arbitration Review, Procedural Fairness, Sanction, Trade Union Rights
Labour Law Unfair Dismissal Insolence Arbitration Review Procedural Fairness Sanction Trade Union Rights

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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SATAWU

Applicant

Penny Mkhize

Applicant

Arivia (Pty) Ltd t/a Arivia.Com

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Dumisane Ngwenya N.O

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrator committed gross irregularities in the conduct of the arbitration proceedings.
  2. 2 Whether the dismissal of the second applicant was procedurally and substantively fair.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator failed to consider material evidence and relevant factors in determining the appropriateness of the sanction.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the arbitrator did not commit any gross irregularity in the conduct of the proceedings. The arbitrator properly excluded irrelevant evidence and focused on the misconduct charge, namely insolence, which was substantiated by the evidence. The arbitrator applied the correct legal standard, exercised his own sense of fairness, and provided detailed reasons for his findings. The omission of certain witness testimony was justified as immaterial to the central issue of misconduct. The arbitrator's reference to 'gross' insolence was not a material irregularity, and the award was reasonable and supported by the facts. The applicants failed to establish any basis for review...

Court Disposition

Review application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The review application is dismissed.
  • The applicants are ordered to pay the costs.