Special Investigating Unit v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR509/2014) [2017] ZALCJHB 127 (21 April 2017)
The Labour Court found that the Commissioner misinterpreted section 186(2)(b) of the Labour Relations Act by equating the lodging of a complaint and investigation with disciplinary action short of dismissal. The Court held that no disciplinary action was taken against Lubita, and therefore, no unfair labour practice occurred. The CCMA lacked jurisdiction as there was no live dispute involving disciplinary action or suspension. The compensation awarded by the Commissioner was unjustified and exceeded her powers, as it was based on sympathy rather than legal entitlement. The award was reviewed and set aside, and substituted with an order that the applicant's conduct did not constitute an...
- Citation
- [2017] ZALCJHB 127
- Parties
- Applicant: Special Investigating Unit; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Commissioner Mabel Sikiti N.O.; Respondent: NEHAWU obo Herbert Lubita
- Court
- Labour Court Johannesburg
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 21 April 2017
- Case Number
- JR509/2014
- Procedural Posture
- Review Application / Labour Court Review of Arbitration Award
- Outcome
- The arbitration award issued by the Commissioner is reviewed and set aside. The conduct of the applicant did not constitute an unfair labour practice. No order as to costs.
- Judges
- E Tlhotlhalemaje
- Legal Topics
- Unfair Labour Practice, Disciplinary Action Short of Dismissal, Jurisdiction of Ccma, Compensation for Unfair Labour Practice
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Special Investigating Unit
Applicant
Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration
Respondent
Commissioner Mabel Sikiti N.O.
Respondent
NEHAWU obo Herbert Lubita
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Labour Court Review of Arbitration Award
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the failure to institute disciplinary proceedings after a complaint and investigation constitutes an unfair labour practice under section 186(2) of the Labour Relations Act.
- 2 Whether the CCMA had jurisdiction to determine the dispute in the absence of disciplinary action or suspension.
- 3 Whether the compensation awarded by the Commissioner was justified in law.
Ratio Decidendi
The Labour Court found that the Commissioner misinterpreted section 186(2)(b) of the Labour Relations Act by equating the lodging of a complaint and investigation with disciplinary action short of dismissal. The Court held that no disciplinary action was taken against Lubita, and therefore, no unfair labour practice occurred. The CCMA lacked jurisdiction as there was no live dispute involving disciplinary action or suspension. The compensation awarded by the Commissioner was unjustified and exceeded her powers, as it was based on sympathy rather than legal entitlement. The award was reviewed and set aside, and substituted with an order that the applicant's conduct did not constitute an...
Court Disposition
The arbitration award issued by the Commissioner is reviewed and set aside. The conduct of the applicant did not constitute an unfair labour practice. No order as to costs.
Orders
- The arbitration award issued by the second respondent under case number FS73311-13 dated 29 January 2012 is reviewed and set aside.
- The award is substituted with an order that the conduct of the Special Investigating Unit against Herbert Lubita did not constitute an unfair labour practice within the meaning of section 186(2)(b) of the Labour Relations Act.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment