Shumane v CCMA and Others (C143/2018) [2019] ZALCCT 18 (2 August 2019)

Shumane v CCMA and Others (C143/2018) [2019] ZALCCT 18 (2 August 2019)

The Court found that, although the Commissioner made material mistakes regarding the reasons for dismissal, these did not result in an award that a reasonable decision-maker could not have made. The applicant's own evidence confirmed that he was argumentative, refused to comply with instructions, and acknowledged his misconduct. The Commissioner correctly accepted that the breathalyzer procedure was part of the company's code of conduct and that the applicant was required to follow management instructions. The finding that dismissal was a fair sanction was reasonable in the circumstances. The applicant's suspension on full pay did not constitute an unfair labour practice, as he suffered...

Citation
[2019] ZALCCT 18
Parties
Applicant: Thandisizwe Terius Shumane; Respondent: CCMA; Respondent: Commissioner S Mohamed; Respondent: BCS Security Services (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 August 2019
Case Number
C143/2018
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Review application dismissed.
Judges
Rabkin-Naicker
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Unfair Labour Practice, Review of Arbitration Award, Insubordination, Procedural Fairness
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Unfair Labour Practice Review of Arbitration Award Insubordination Procedural Fairness

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thandisizwe Terius Shumane

Applicant

CCMA

Respondent

Commissioner S Mohamed

Respondent

BCS Security Services (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Commissioner's award was reviewable on the grounds advanced by the applicant.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's dismissal was substantively and procedurally unfair.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's suspension on full pay constituted an unfair labour practice.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that, although the Commissioner made material mistakes regarding the reasons for dismissal, these did not result in an award that a reasonable decision-maker could not have made. The applicant's own evidence confirmed that he was argumentative, refused to comply with instructions, and acknowledged his misconduct. The Commissioner correctly accepted that the breathalyzer procedure was part of the company's code of conduct and that the applicant was required to follow management instructions. The finding that dismissal was a fair sanction was reasonable in the circumstances. The applicant's suspension on full pay did not constitute an unfair labour practice, as he suffered...

Court Disposition

Review application dismissed.

Orders

  • The review application is dismissed.