Statistics South Africa v Molebatsi and Another (JR943/17) [2019] ZALCJHB 212; (2019) 40 ILJ 2603 (LC) (21 August 2019)

Statistics South Africa v Molebatsi and Another (JR943/17) [2019] ZALCJHB 212; (2019) 40 ILJ 2603 (LC) (21 August 2019)

The Court found that condonation for the late filing of both the review application and the answering affidavit was warranted due to reasonable explanations and minimal delay. On the merits, the Court held that the sanction of one month’s suspension without pay was rational and reasonable. The presiding officer had properly considered the circumstances, including the delay in charging Mr Molebatsi, the lack of evidence of further misconduct, and the fact that the appointment in question ultimately benefited the employer. The Court emphasized that not every instance of dishonesty warrants dismissal and that the trust relationship was not irreparably damaged. The application to review and...

Citation
[2019] ZALCJHB 212
Parties
Applicant: Statistics South Africa; Respondent: Mr Dikgang Molebatsi; Respondent: Mr Mzwandile Hlanjwa
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
21 August 2019
Case Number
JR943/17
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review and Condonation
Outcome
Application to review and set aside the sanction is dismissed.
Judges
P Nkutha-Nkontwana
Legal Topics
Condonation, Review of Disciplinary Sanction, Trust Relationship, Dishonesty in Employment, Internal Disciplinary Process
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation Review of Disciplinary Sanction Trust Relationship Dishonesty in Employment Internal Disciplinary Process

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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Statistics South Africa

Applicant

Mr Dikgang Molebatsi

Respondent

Mr Mzwandile Hlanjwa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review and Condonation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether condonation should be granted for the late filing of the review application and answering affidavit.
  2. 2 Whether the sanction of one month’s suspension without pay imposed on Mr Molebatsi was irrational and should be substituted with dismissal.
  3. 3 Whether the absence of a transcribed record precludes the review.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that condonation for the late filing of both the review application and the answering affidavit was warranted due to reasonable explanations and minimal delay. On the merits, the Court held that the sanction of one month’s suspension without pay was rational and reasonable. The presiding officer had properly considered the circumstances, including the delay in charging Mr Molebatsi, the lack of evidence of further misconduct, and the fact that the appointment in question ultimately benefited the employer. The Court emphasized that not every instance of dishonesty warrants dismissal and that the trust relationship was not irreparably damaged. The application to review and...

Court Disposition

Application to review and set aside the sanction is dismissed.

Orders

  • Condonation for the late filing of the review application is granted.
  • Condonation for the late filing of the answering affidavit is granted.