Siemens Ltd v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR 2672/08) [2011] ZALCJHB 111; (2012) 33 ILJ 1476 (LC) (8 December 2011)

Siemens Ltd v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR 2672/08) [2011] ZALCJHB 111; (2012) 33 ILJ 1476 (LC) (8 December 2011)

The commissioner did not commit a reviewable irregularity by issuing a certificate of outcome without determining the existence of an employment relationship between the applicant and the fourth respondent. The legal principles and relevant case law establish that the only true jurisdictional questions at conciliation relate to time limits and bargaining council scope, not the existence of an employment relationship. The evidence before the Court showed that the fourth respondent was employed by Faranani IT Services (Pty) Limited and not by the applicant. Therefore, no employment relationship existed between the applicant and the fourth respondent, and the CCMA lacked jurisdiction to...

Citation
[2011] ZALCJHB 111
Parties
Applicant: Siemens Limited; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: David Dikwabane N.O; Respondent: Arnause Mohlala N.O; Respondent: Govindsamy Silvan Chetty
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 December 2011
Case Number
JR 2672/08
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application to review and set aside the certificate of outcome is dismissed. The fourth respondent was not employed by the applicant and the CCMA lacks jurisdiction to arbitrate the dispute.
Judges
K M Savage
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of Ccma, Employment Relationship, Unfair Dismissal, Conciliation Procedure
Labour Law Jurisdiction of Ccma Employment Relationship Unfair Dismissal Conciliation Procedure

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Siemens Limited

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

David Dikwabane N.O

Respondent

Arnause Mohlala N.O

Respondent

Govindsamy Silvan Chetty

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the commissioner committed a reviewable irregularity by issuing a certificate of outcome without determining the existence of an employment relationship between the applicant and the fourth respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the CCMA had jurisdiction to arbitrate the dispute referred by the fourth respondent.
  3. 3 Whether the fourth respondent was employed by the applicant.

Ratio Decidendi

The commissioner did not commit a reviewable irregularity by issuing a certificate of outcome without determining the existence of an employment relationship between the applicant and the fourth respondent. The legal principles and relevant case law establish that the only true jurisdictional questions at conciliation relate to time limits and bargaining council scope, not the existence of an employment relationship. The evidence before the Court showed that the fourth respondent was employed by Faranani IT Services (Pty) Limited and not by the applicant. Therefore, no employment relationship existed between the applicant and the fourth respondent, and the CCMA lacked jurisdiction to...

Court Disposition

Application to review and set aside the certificate of outcome is dismissed. The fourth respondent was not employed by the applicant and the CCMA lacks jurisdiction to arbitrate the dispute.

Orders

  • The application to review and set aside the certificate of outcome issued under case number GATW10954-08 dated 24 November 2008 is dismissed.
  • The fourth respondent was not employed by the applicant and the first respondent accordingly lacks jurisdiction to arbitrate the dispute referred to it under case number GATW10954-08.