Sehloho v Havenga NO and Others (JR965/15) [2017] ZALCJHB 194 (13 March 2017)

Sehloho v Havenga NO and Others (JR965/15) [2017] ZALCJHB 194 (13 March 2017)

The court found that the arbitrator's inference of an improper relationship and consequent finding of corruption or dishonesty was not supported by the evidence presented. The only evidence of a relationship between the applicant and the learner was that they attended church together and interacted at school, which did not amount to corruption or dishonesty. The Deputy Principal confirmed there was no improper relationship. Therefore, the arbitrator's decision was unreasonable and could not be sustained. Regarding the second charge, the applicant admitted guilt to issuing reports without authority, but the court held that this misconduct did not ordinarily warrant dismissal. The...

Citation
[2017] ZALCJHB 194
Parties
Applicant: Masamuel Patience Sehloho; Respondent: Coen Havenga N.O.; Respondent: Education Labour Relations Council; Respondent: Department of Education: Free State
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 March 2017
Case Number
JR965/15
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
The arbitration award is reviewed and set aside. The applicant is reinstated with a written warning valid for 12 months. Costs are awarded against the third respondent.
Judges
Van Niekerk
Legal Topics
Employment of Educators Act, Unfair Dismissal, Disciplinary Procedure, Arbitration Review
Labour Law Civil Procedure Employment of Educators Act Unfair Dismissal Disciplinary Procedure Arbitration Review

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Masamuel Patience Sehloho

Applicant

Coen Havenga N.O.

Respondent

Education Labour Relations Council

Respondent

Department of Education: Free State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrator's finding of misconduct in the form of corruption and dishonesty was supported by the evidence.
  2. 2 Whether the penalty of dismissal for issuing reports without authority was appropriate.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant should be reinstated with a lesser sanction.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the arbitrator's inference of an improper relationship and consequent finding of corruption or dishonesty was not supported by the evidence presented. The only evidence of a relationship between the applicant and the learner was that they attended church together and interacted at school, which did not amount to corruption or dishonesty. The Deputy Principal confirmed there was no improper relationship. Therefore, the arbitrator's decision was unreasonable and could not be sustained. Regarding the second charge, the applicant admitted guilt to issuing reports without authority, but the court held that this misconduct did not ordinarily warrant dismissal. The...

Court Disposition

The arbitration award is reviewed and set aside. The applicant is reinstated with a written warning valid for 12 months. Costs are awarded against the third respondent.

Orders

  • The arbitration award issued by the first respondent on 7 April 2015 under case PSES461-14/15FS is reviewed and set aside.
  • The arbitration award is substituted with: (a) The applicant is guilty of charge 2 of the charges of misconduct brought against her. (b) The penalty of unfair dismissal is unduly harsh and the applicant is reinstated into the employ of the respondent subject to a written warning valid for a period of 12 months.