Shabangu v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1232/2016) [2017] ZALCJHB 336 (29 August 2017)

Shabangu v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1232/2016) [2017] ZALCJHB 336 (29 August 2017)

The court found that the commissioner properly analysed the evidence and made reasonable credibility findings. The applicant did not challenge the credibility of the respondent's witnesses, nor did he put his version to them. The court held that the probabilities favoured the employer and that the commissioner’s failure to explicitly mention the weighing of probabilities did not render the award reviewable. The application for review was therefore dismissed.

Citation
[2017] ZALCJHB 336
Parties
Applicant: Vellie Peter Shabangu; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Commissioner Qanita Rustin; Respondent: Amalgamated Beverage Industries Bottling (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 August 2017
Case Number
JR1232/2016
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
Application for review dismissed; no order as to costs.
Judges
Werner Kruger
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Review of Arbitration Award, Credibility Assessment, Circumstantial Evidence
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Review of Arbitration Award Credibility Assessment Circumstantial Evidence

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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vellie Peter Shabangu

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Commissioner Qanita Rustin

Respondent

Amalgamated Beverage Industries Bottling (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitration award issued by the second respondent was reviewable on grounds of misconduct or gross irregularity.
  2. 2 Whether the commissioner properly evaluated the evidence and probabilities in finding the dismissal fair.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's failure to challenge material evidence affected the outcome.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the commissioner properly analysed the evidence and made reasonable credibility findings. The applicant did not challenge the credibility of the respondent's witnesses, nor did he put his version to them. The court held that the probabilities favoured the employer and that the commissioner’s failure to explicitly mention the weighing of probabilities did not render the award reviewable. The application for review was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for review dismissed; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The applicant's application for review is dismissed.
  • There is no order as to costs.