Transnet Ltd v Transnet Bargaining Council and Others (JR 187/10) [2013] ZALCJHB 153 (30 April 2013)

Transnet Ltd v Transnet Bargaining Council and Others (JR 187/10) [2013] ZALCJHB 153 (30 April 2013)

The court found that the commissioner exceeded his powers by deciding issues beyond those agreed in the pre-arbitration minute, which only required determination of whether the applicant erred in not inviting Mr Luus to the interview and whether that constituted an unfair labour practice. The commissioner’s award was unreasonable and reviewable under section 145 of the Labour Relations Act. The evidence showed that Mr Luus did not meet the essential requirements for the position, particularly in terms of managerial experience, and the applicant did not commit any unfair labour practice by not shortlisting him. The pre-arbitration agreement was binding, and there was no evidence that the...

Citation
[2013] ZALCJHB 153
Parties
Applicant: Transnet Limited; Respondent: Transnet Bargaining Council; Respondent: Adv M. Dollie, NO; Respondent: M. Luus; Respondent: UASA-The Union
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 April 2013
Case Number
JR187/2010
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment After Hearing of Review Application
Outcome
Review application granted; arbitration award set aside; no costs order made.
Judges
Cele
Legal Topics
Unfair Labour Practice, Promotion Dispute, Arbitration Review, Pre Arbitration Agreement, Commissioner Powers
Labour Law Unfair Labour Practice Promotion Dispute Arbitration Review Pre Arbitration Agreement Commissioner Powers

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Transnet Limited

Applicant

Transnet Bargaining Council

Respondent

Adv M. Dollie, NO

Respondent

M. Luus

Respondent

UASA-The Union

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment After Hearing of Review Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the failure to shortlist Mr Luus for an interview constituted an unfair labour practice under section 186(2)(a) of the Labour Relations Act.
  2. 2 Whether the commissioner exceeded his powers by deciding issues beyond those agreed in the pre-arbitration minute.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitration award was unreasonable and reviewable under section 145 of the Labour Relations Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the commissioner exceeded his powers by deciding issues beyond those agreed in the pre-arbitration minute, which only required determination of whether the applicant erred in not inviting Mr Luus to the interview and whether that constituted an unfair labour practice. The commissioner’s award was unreasonable and reviewable under section 145 of the Labour Relations Act. The evidence showed that Mr Luus did not meet the essential requirements for the position, particularly in terms of managerial experience, and the applicant did not commit any unfair labour practice by not shortlisting him. The pre-arbitration agreement was binding, and there was no evidence that the...

Court Disposition

Review application granted; arbitration award set aside; no costs order made.

Orders

  • The review application in this matter is granted.
  • No costs order is made.