South Africa Case Law

Van der Merwe and Others v Bevcon Management Services (Pty) Ltd and Another (3519/17; 21816/1)

Van der Merwe and Others v Bevcon Management Services (Pty) Ltd and Another (3519/17; 21816/1) [2020] ZAGPPHC 234 (21 February 2020)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

3519/17; 21816/1

Judge

N V Khumalo

The High Court dismissed a review of an arbitration award arising from a building contract dispute, finding no gross irregularity, misconduct, or improper procurement.

• Arbitration Review
• Gross Irregularity
• Building Contract Dispute
• Condonation
• Evidence In Arbitration
• Arbitration-review

Aphane v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR2790/12)

Aphane v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR2790/12) [2017] ZALCJHB 391 (25 October 2017)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR2790/12

Judge

P.M. Mosebo

The court found that the commissioner’s error regarding the physical check on the system was immaterial and did not distort the outcome. The applicant’s absence during the physical search did not render the proceedings unfair, as there is no legal requirement for the employee to be present during such investigations. The evidence relied upon at arbitration was properly admitted, and the applicant’s reliance on the third respondent’s bundle undermined his own argument. The court concluded that none of the grounds for review were substantiated by the record, and the commissioner’s decision was…

Source excerpt

• Unfair Dismissal
• Review Of Arbitration Award
• Gross Irregularity
• Disciplinary Procedure
• Evidence In Arbitration

Astore Africa (Pty) Ltd v Commission for conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR 1895/05)

Astore Africa (Pty) Ltd v Commission for conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR 1895/05) [2007] ZALC 54; [2008] 1 BLLR 14 (LC) (31 August 2007)

Court

Labour Court

Case number

JR 1895/05

Judge

Molahlehi

The court found that the commissioner applied the correct legal principles and properly weighed the evidence presented. The commissioner posed the correct question regarding whether the employee's ability to perform his duties, specifically driving, was impaired by alcohol consumption. The evidence established that the employee had consumed alcohol and tested positive, but did not prove that his faculties were impaired to the extent required for dismissal. The commissioner’s reasoning was rational and justifiable, and there was no misconduct, irregularity, or impropriety. The review applicati…

Source excerpt

• Unfair Dismissal
• Review Of Arbitration Award
• Substantive Fairness
• Evidence In Arbitration
• Drunkenness As Misconduct