Visser v Vector Logistics (Pty) Ltd and Others (JR 1020/16) [2018] ZALCJHB 358 (2 November 2018)

Visser v Vector Logistics (Pty) Ltd and Others (JR 1020/16) [2018] ZALCJHB 358 (2 November 2018)

The court found that the applicant's review application was filed approximately 11 months late and lacked a reasonable explanation for the delay, with no sufficient prospects of success. The commissioner misconstrued the inquiry regarding inconsistency, as the comparator employee was not charged with the same misconduct. The finding of harshness of the sanction was not supported by evidence that training or instruction would remedy the applicant's conduct. The applicant's lack of remorse and persistent denial of wrongdoing undermined the possibility of restoring the employment relationship. The commissioner’s decision was not one that a reasonable decision-maker could reach, and the award...

Citation
[2018] ZALCJHB 358
Parties
Applicant: Michelle Visser; Respondent: Vector Logistics (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Hlalele Molotsi N.O.
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 November 2018
Case Number
JR 1020/16
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
The arbitration award is reviewed and set aside; the applicant's dismissal is found to be substantively fair; no order as to costs.
Judges
M M Baloyi
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Review of Arbitration Award, Condonation, Inconsistency, Gross Negligence
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Review of Arbitration Award Condonation Inconsistency Gross Negligence

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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michelle Visser

Applicant

Vector Logistics (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Hlalele Molotsi N.O.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitration award finding the applicant's dismissal substantively unfair should be reviewed and set aside.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's late review application should be condoned.
  3. 3 Whether the commissioner misconstrued the inquiry regarding inconsistency and harshness of sanction.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's review application was filed approximately 11 months late and lacked a reasonable explanation for the delay, with no sufficient prospects of success. The commissioner misconstrued the inquiry regarding inconsistency, as the comparator employee was not charged with the same misconduct. The finding of harshness of the sanction was not supported by evidence that training or instruction would remedy the applicant's conduct. The applicant's lack of remorse and persistent denial of wrongdoing undermined the possibility of restoring the employment relationship. The commissioner’s decision was not one that a reasonable decision-maker could reach, and the award...

Court Disposition

The arbitration award is reviewed and set aside; the applicant's dismissal is found to be substantively fair; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The arbitration award issued by the commissioner under case number GATW 12330-14 is reviewed and set aside and substituted with an order that the applicant's dismissal is found to be substantively fair.
  • There is no order as to costs.