Wayi Wayi and Another v Metal And Engineering Industries Bargaining Council and Others (C439/2014) [2015] ZALCCT 29 (12 March 2015)

Wayi Wayi and Another v Metal And Engineering Industries Bargaining Council and Others (C439/2014) [2015] ZALCCT 29 (12 March 2015)

The court found that the applicants failed to establish that they had been dismissed by the third respondent. The evidence showed that employees were placed on short time and that the company had requested the applicants to return to work. The arbitrator had carefully recorded the evidence and there was no basis in law or fact to review the award. Allegations of bias against the arbitrator were unfounded and did not amount to a reasonable apprehension of bias. The applicants' rejection of reinstatement further undermined their claim of dismissal. The review application was therefore dismissed.

Citation
[2015] ZALCCT 29
Parties
Applicant: Ali Kimpala Wayi Wayi; Applicant: Freddy Mbuyi Kabunda; Respondent: Metal and Engineering Industries Bargaining Council; Respondent: Commissioner SH Christie; Respondent: Trymore Investments 117 CC
Court
Labour Court Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 March 2015
Case Number
C439/2014
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Opposed Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
The review application is dismissed.
Judges
Rabkin-Naicker
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Review of Arbitration Award, Condonation, Short Time Work, Reasonable Apprehension of Bias
Labour Law Unfair Dismissal Review of Arbitration Award Condonation Short Time Work Reasonable Apprehension of Bias

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ali Kimpala Wayi Wayi

Applicant

Freddy Mbuyi Kabunda

Applicant

Metal and Engineering Industries Bargaining Council

Respondent

Commissioner SH Christie

Respondent

Trymore Investments 117 CC

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Opposed Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants were dismissed by the third respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitrator's award was reviewable under section 145 of the LRA.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants' rejection of reinstatement affected their claim of dismissal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to establish that they had been dismissed by the third respondent. The evidence showed that employees were placed on short time and that the company had requested the applicants to return to work. The arbitrator had carefully recorded the evidence and there was no basis in law or fact to review the award. Allegations of bias against the arbitrator were unfounded and did not amount to a reasonable apprehension of bias. The applicants' rejection of reinstatement further undermined their claim of dismissal. The review application was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

The review application is dismissed.

Orders

  • The review application is dismissed.