Skhosana v Gauteng Coaches (Pty) Ltd and Others (JR 307/09) [2011] ZALCJHB 174 (9 February 2011)

Skhosana v Gauteng Coaches (Pty) Ltd and Others (JR 307/09) [2011] ZALCJHB 174 (9 February 2011)

The court found that the applicant's explanation for the nine-month delay in referring his unfair dismissal dispute was unsatisfactory and lacked credibility. The medical certificate provided did not justify the extended period of inactivity, especially since the applicant was able to make an initial referral shortly after the alleged onset of illness. Additional explanations offered in court were not presented to the arbitrator and could not be considered. On the merits, the applicant failed to provide sufficient information to support his claim of unfair dismissal, and documentary evidence contradicted his assertions regarding misconduct and procedural fairness. The arbitrator's...

Citation
[2011] ZALCJHB 174
Parties
Applicant: Isaac T. Skhosana; Respondent: Gauteng Coaches (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Commissioner K. Kleinot; Respondent: South African Road Passenger Bargaining Council
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
9 February 2011
Case Number
JR 307/09
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application to set aside the arbitrator's condonation ruling is dismissed.
Judges
Lagrange
Legal Topics
Condonation, Unfair Dismissal, Late Referral, Review of Arbitration, Prejudice, Prospects of Success
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Unfair Dismissal Late Referral Review of Arbitration Prejudice Prospects of Success

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

Isaac T. Skhosana

Applicant

Gauteng Coaches (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Commissioner K. Kleinot

Respondent

South African Road Passenger Bargaining Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrator's refusal to grant condonation for the late referral of the unfair dismissal dispute was reasonable.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant provided satisfactory reasons for the delay in referring his dispute.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's prospects of success on the merits justified condonation.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's explanation for the nine-month delay in referring his unfair dismissal dispute was unsatisfactory and lacked credibility. The medical certificate provided did not justify the extended period of inactivity, especially since the applicant was able to make an initial referral shortly after the alleged onset of illness. Additional explanations offered in court were not presented to the arbitrator and could not be considered. On the merits, the applicant failed to provide sufficient information to support his claim of unfair dismissal, and documentary evidence contradicted his assertions regarding misconduct and procedural fairness. The arbitrator's...

Court Disposition

Application to set aside the arbitrator's condonation ruling is dismissed.

Orders

  • The application to set aside the second respondent's condonation ruling dated 11 February 2009 under case number SARPBAC 08/69 is dismissed.
  • No order is made as to costs.