Step Ahead v Mokwena NO and Others (JR1203/13) [2015] ZALCJHB 439 (28 December 2015)

Step Ahead v Mokwena NO and Others (JR1203/13) [2015] ZALCJHB 439 (28 December 2015)

The Commissioner materially failed to consider the polygraph test results in assessing the fairness of the dismissal. This omission rendered the arbitration award unreasonable, as the Commissioner did not fully and fairly determine the dispute by disregarding relevant evidence. Consequently, the review application succeeds, but the court is not in a position to substitute its own decision and thus remits the matter to the CCMA for rehearing before a different Commissioner.

Citation
[2015] ZALCJHB 439
Parties
Applicant: Step Ahead; Respondent: Seleele Mokwena, N.O.; Respondent: The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Boitumelo Seichokelo
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 December 2015
Case Number
JR1203/13
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Review application upheld; arbitration award set aside and matter remitted for rehearing before a different Commissioner.
Judges
E Molahlehi
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Polygraph Evidence, Arbitration Review, Reasonable Decision Maker
Labour Law Unfair Dismissal Polygraph Evidence Arbitration Review Reasonable Decision Maker

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Step Ahead

Applicant

Seleele Mokwena, N.O.

Respondent

The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Boitumelo Seichokelo

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Commissioner failed to consider material evidence, specifically the polygraph test results, in determining the fairness of the dismissal.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitration award was one that a reasonable decision maker could reach.
  3. 3 Whether the matter should be remitted for rehearing by a different Commissioner.

Ratio Decidendi

The Commissioner materially failed to consider the polygraph test results in assessing the fairness of the dismissal. This omission rendered the arbitration award unreasonable, as the Commissioner did not fully and fairly determine the dispute by disregarding relevant evidence. Consequently, the review application succeeds, but the court is not in a position to substitute its own decision and thus remits the matter to the CCMA for rehearing before a different Commissioner.

Court Disposition

Review application upheld; arbitration award set aside and matter remitted for rehearing before a different Commissioner.

Orders

  • The arbitration award issued by the first respondent under case number GATW4191-13 dated 03 May 2013 is reviewed and set aside.
  • The matter is remitted to the second respondent to be heard by a commissioner other than the first respondent.