Urban Security CC v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (J3256/99) [2000] ZALC 47 (19 June 2000)

Urban Security CC v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (J3256/99) [2000] ZALC 47 (19 June 2000)

The court found that the commissioner’s conclusion that Mr Semenya was subjected to double jeopardy was rational and justifiable. The first disciplinary enquiry had been completed, and Mr Semenya was not found guilty by the criminal court. The subsequent disciplinary action and dismissal were therefore improper and unfair. The union was not properly notified or involved in the second enquiry, further undermining procedural fairness. The application to review and set aside the commissioner’s award was dismissed as there was no basis to interfere with the findings.

Citation
[2000] ZALC 47
Parties
Applicant: Urban Security CC; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 June 2000
Case Number
J3256/99
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application for review and setting aside of the CCMA award is dismissed.
Judges
A A Landman
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Double Jeopardy, Disciplinary Procedure, Review of Arbitration Award
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Double Jeopardy Disciplinary Procedure Review of Arbitration Award

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Urban Security CC

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the commissioner committed gross irregularities in the arbitration process.
  2. 2 Whether it was procedurally and substantively unfair to dismiss Mr Semenya after a second disciplinary enquiry.
  3. 3 Whether the principle of double jeopardy applies to internal disciplinary proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the commissioner’s conclusion that Mr Semenya was subjected to double jeopardy was rational and justifiable. The first disciplinary enquiry had been completed, and Mr Semenya was not found guilty by the criminal court. The subsequent disciplinary action and dismissal were therefore improper and unfair. The union was not properly notified or involved in the second enquiry, further undermining procedural fairness. The application to review and set aside the commissioner’s award was dismissed as there was no basis to interfere with the findings.

Court Disposition

Application for review and setting aside of the CCMA award is dismissed.

Orders

  • The application to review and set aside the commissioner’s award is dismissed.