Woolworths v Commission For Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR2457/18) [2025] ZALCJHB 305 (14 May 2025)

Woolworths v Commission For Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR2457/18) [2025] ZALCJHB 305 (14 May 2025)

The Labour Court found that the arbitrator's award was unreasonable and unsupported by the evidence. The arbitrator relied on a statement from Ms Tsebe, who was not authorised to grant leave and was not a witness at the arbitration. The evidence from Mr Mabaso and Mr Ngobeni was uncontested and established that the Third Respondent left the store without permission and threatened his supervisors. The arbitrator failed to properly consider this evidence and gave preference to the Third Respondent's version without cogent reasons. The Third Respondent's failure to clock out could have resulted in fraudulent wage claims, and the trust relationship had irretrievably broken down. The Court...

Citation
[2025] ZALCJHB 305
Parties
Applicant: Woolworths (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Donald Kgalake Nkadimeng N.O.; Respondent: Abram Dikhoele Ramaboka
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
14 May 2025
Case Number
JR2457/18
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
The review application is granted. The arbitration award is reviewed and set aside. The dismissal of the Third Respondent is found to be substantively fair. No order as to costs.
Judges
Marques
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Review of Arbitration Award, Condonation, Substantive Fairness, Threats and Intimidation
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Review of Arbitration Award Condonation Substantive Fairness Threats and Intimidation

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Woolworths (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Donald Kgalake Nkadimeng N.O.

Respondent

Abram Dikhoele Ramaboka

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrator's award finding the dismissal substantively unfair was reasonable.
  2. 2 Whether the Third Respondent's conduct constituted misconduct justifying dismissal.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator properly considered the evidence of threats and unauthorised absence.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Court found that the arbitrator's award was unreasonable and unsupported by the evidence. The arbitrator relied on a statement from Ms Tsebe, who was not authorised to grant leave and was not a witness at the arbitration. The evidence from Mr Mabaso and Mr Ngobeni was uncontested and established that the Third Respondent left the store without permission and threatened his supervisors. The arbitrator failed to properly consider this evidence and gave preference to the Third Respondent's version without cogent reasons. The Third Respondent's failure to clock out could have resulted in fraudulent wage claims, and the trust relationship had irretrievably broken down. The Court...

Court Disposition

The review application is granted. The arbitration award is reviewed and set aside. The dismissal of the Third Respondent is found to be substantively fair. No order as to costs.

Orders

  • The late filing of the Applicant’s review application is condoned.
  • The Second Respondent’s award under case number LP4966/18 dated 24 September 2018 is reviewed and set aside, and substituted with the order that the dismissal of the Third Respondent by the Applicant was substantively fair.