South Africa Case Law

Goba v Rand West City Local Municipality and Another (J1069/21)

Goba v Rand West City Local Municipality and Another (J1069/21) [2021] ZALCJHB 301 (20 September 2021)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J1069/21

Judge

G N Moshoana

The court held that the disciplinary hearing commenced when the applicant was served with a charge sheet within the prescribed three-month period, in line with the principle established in Ntsimane. Therefore, the suspension did not lapse automatically. The chairperson was empowered under both the employment contract and the regulations to extend the precautionary suspension. The applicant failed to establish any factual or legal basis for the review, and the chairperson's decision was not reviewable under section 158(1)(h) as it did not involve the exercise of public power. The application w…

Source excerpt

• Precautionary Suspension
• Disciplinary Hearing Procedure
• Review Of Chairperson Decision
• Local Government Regulations

Nkatingi v Road Agency Limpopo (SOC) Ltd (J793/20)

Nkatingi v Road Agency Limpopo (SOC) Ltd (J793/20) [2021] ZALCJHB 30 (4 March 2021)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J793/20

Judge

Coetzee

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate any reasonable prospect of success on appeal against the cost order. The urgency was manufactured by the applicant's conduct, specifically by giving the respondent only 24 hours' notice before approaching the court, without adequate explanation for not acting sooner. The reasons for the cost order were fully addressed in the original judgment, and no new grounds were raised. There were no compelling reasons to grant leave to appeal, and the statutory requirements for leave to appeal were not met.

Source excerpt

• Costs In Labour Court
• Urgency In Labour Disputes
• Leave To Appeal
• Disciplinary Hearing Procedure

Health Professions Council of South Africa v Basson (29967/15)

Health Professions Council of South Africa v Basson (29967/15) [2019] ZAGPPHC 149 (7 May 2019)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

29967/15

Judge

Potterill

The High Court refused leave to appeal in a disciplinary-bias dispute, holding there was no reasonable prospect of success and awarding costs.

• Recusal Application
• Reasonable Apprehension Of Bias
• Internal Remedy Effectiveness
• Disciplinary Hearing Procedure
• Administrative-law
• Leave-to-appeal

Reddi v University of KwaZulu Natal (D827/13)

Reddi v University of KwaZulu Natal (D827/13) [2015] ZALCD 14; [2015] 6 BLLR 625 (LC); (2015) 36 ILJ 1915 (LC) (4 February 2015)

Court

Labour Court Durban

Case number

D827/13

Judge

Mooki

The Labour Court held it lacked jurisdiction to order resumption of a disciplinary hearing after dismissal; the applicant had to pursue the dispute at the CCMA.

• Unfair Dismissal
• Jurisdiction Of Labour Court
• Specific Performance
• Disciplinary Hearing Procedure
• Unfair-dismissal
• Labour-court-jurisdiction

Benn v South African Diamond And Precious Metals Regulator (J2401/14)

Benn v South African Diamond And Precious Metals Regulator (J2401/14) [2014] ZALCJHB 424 (21 October 2014)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J2401/14

Judge

Nkutha-Nkontwana

The court found that the applicant failed to establish urgency as required by rule 6(12). The applicant was aware of his right to request the information from the disciplinary hearing chairperson and had not done so. Even if the chairperson refused and the applicant was dismissed, he would have substantial redress through the dispute resolution mechanisms provided by the Labour Relations Act. The application was therefore premature and did not justify urgent intervention by the court.

Source excerpt

• Urgent Interdict
• Disclosure Of Information
• Disciplinary Hearing Procedure
• Alternative Dispute Resolution

Mashiya v Sirkhot NO and Others (J1744/11)

Mashiya v Sirkhot NO and Others (J1744/11) [2011] ZALCJHB 75; [2012] 2 BLLR 183 (LC); (2012) 33 ILJ 420 (LC) (30 August 2011)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J1744/11

Judge

A J Steenkamp

The court found that the applicant failed to establish a reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of the chairperson, Adv Sirkhot. The chairperson's refusal to allow legal representation was a reasonable exercise of discretion under the SMS Handbook, and his prior involvement in other disciplinary matters did not amount to bias. The alleged altercation between the chairperson and the union representative was no more than robust debate and did not indicate bias. The appointment of the chairperson was not irregular, and no evidence suggested improper influence. The applicant did not adequate…

Source excerpt

• Recusal Of Chairperson
• Reasonable Apprehension Of Bias
• Disciplinary Hearing Procedure
• Legal Representation In Internal Hearings

Minister of Labour v General Public Service Sectoral Bargaining Council and Others (JR723/05)

Minister of Labour v General Public Service Sectoral Bargaining Council and Others (JR723/05) [2006] ZALCJHB 22 (17 October 2006)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR723/05

Judge

Francis

The Labour Court dismissed a review of an arbitration award finding that a precautionary suspension lasting over 60 days was an unfair labour practice.

• Unfair Labour Practice
• Precautionary Suspension
• Disciplinary Hearing Procedure
• Review Of Arbitration Award
• Unfair-labour-practice
• Precautionary-suspension

Crystallite Plastics (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation Mediation And Arbitration and Others (JR258/02)

Crystallite Plastics (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation Mediation And Arbitration and Others (JR258/02) [2002] ZALCJHB 29 (19 March 2002)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR258/02

Judge

E Revelas

The court found that the disciplinary process was procedurally unfair, as the respondents were denied the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses and were subjected to two hearings without exceptional circumstances. The arbitrator failed to consider the substantive fairness of the dismissals, focusing only on procedural aspects. The court held that procedural unfairness at the disciplinary stage could be cured by a proper arbitration hearing, but the arbitrator did not apply his mind to the substantive evidence. Accordingly, the award was set aside and the matter referred back to the CCMA for…

Source excerpt

• Unfair Dismissal
• Disciplinary Hearing Procedure
• Arbitration Review
• Procedural Fairness
• Substantive Fairness

Rust v Royalyard Holdings 11 (Proprietary) Limited and Another (J4380/01)

Rust v Royalyard Holdings 11 (Proprietary) Limited and Another (J4380/01) [2001] ZALC 162 (8 October 2001)

Court

Labour Court

Case number

J4380/01

Judge

E Revelas

Labour Court held that, absent a disciplinary code, a chairperson must be allowed to consider whether to permit legal representation at a hearing.

• Disciplinary Hearing Procedure
• Legal Representation
• Audi Alteram Partem
• Employment Contract Terms
• Disciplinary-hearing-procedure
• Legal-representation