South Africa Case Law

Fraser Alexander (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR710/21)

Fraser Alexander (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR710/21) [2025] ZALCJHB 110 (14 March 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR710/21

Judge

Adams

The court found that the commissioner committed misconduct and a gross irregularity by permitting the third respondent’s legal representative to be present during the conciliation phase, contrary to the peremptory provisions of section 135(4) of the Labour Relations Act and Rule 25(1)(a) of the CCMA Rules. Furthermore, the commissioner failed to exercise his discretion judicially when allowing legal representation for the third respondent during arbitration without a formal application or proper consideration of the Rule 25 criteria. Critically, the applicant, represented by a layperson, was…

Source excerpt

• Legal Representation In Ccma
• Procedural Fairness
• Gross Irregularity
• Misconduct By Commissioner
• Arbitration Review
• Remittal For De Novo Arbitration

Mogata v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (C617/2019)

Mogata v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (C617/2019) [2021] ZALCCT 23 (13 May 2021)

Court

Labour Court Cape Town

Case number

C617/2019

Judge

Rabkin-Naicker

The Labour Court reviewed and set aside a CCMA ruling after the commissioner disqualified the applicant’s attorney without hearing argument on legal representation.

• Legal Representation In Ccma
• Gross Irregularity
• Review Of Arbitration Award
• Rule 25 Ccma
• Right Of Appearance
• Ccma-review

POPCRU Group of Companies v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1201/2014)

POPCRU Group of Companies v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1201/2014) [2016] ZALCJHB 406 (18 October 2016)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR1201/2014

Judge

Bailey

The Labour Court dismissed a review of a CCMA award, finding no reviewable error in legal representation, postponement refusal, fairness findings, or compensation.

• Legal Representation In Ccma
• Postponement Of Arbitration
• Procedural Fairness
• Substantive Fairness
• Compensation Award
• Ccma-legal-representation

Motshekga v Commission for Conciliation Mediation And Arbitration and Others (JR2245/12)

Motshekga v Commission for Conciliation Mediation And Arbitration and Others (JR2245/12) [2015] ZALCJHB 242 (7 August 2015)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR2245/12

Judge

Molahlehi

The court found that the Commissioner properly exercised her discretion in refusing legal representation, as the matter was not legally complex and the applicant failed to demonstrate any inequality in comparative ability. The Commissioner considered all relevant factors and applied her mind to the issue. On the merits, the applicant was aware of her duties and performance standards, was given reasonable opportunities and training to improve, and her continued poor performance justified dismissal. The third respondent substantially complied with its policy on managing poor work performance, a…

Source excerpt

• Unfair Dismissal
• Legal Representation In Ccma
• Poor Work Performance
• Ccma Rules
• Code Of Good Practice Dismissal

National Union of Mineworkers and Another v Commission for Conciliation Mediation And Arbitration and Others (JR1864/11)

National Union of Mineworkers and Another v Commission for Conciliation Mediation And Arbitration and Others (JR1864/11) [2015] ZALCJHB 218 (22 July 2015)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR1864/11

Judge

Tlhotlhalemaje

The Labour Court dismissed a review of a CCMA award upholding Reuben van Donder’s dismissal for fraud and dishonesty, and condoned a late replying affidavit.

• Unfair Dismissal
• Arbitration Review
• Legal Representation In Ccma
• Fraud And Dishonesty
• Condonation Of Late Filing
• Arbitration-review

Lippert and Another v Commission for Conciliation Mediation And Arbitration and Others (C1032/2012)

Lippert and Another v Commission for Conciliation Mediation And Arbitration and Others (C1032/2012) [2014] ZALCCT 42 (31 July 2014)

Court

Labour Court Cape Town

Case number

C1032/2012

Judge

Rabkin-Naicker

The Labour Court reviewed and set aside a CCMA award after finding the commissioner wrongly refused legal representation and caused procedural unfairness.

• Review Of Arbitration Award
• Legal Representation In Ccma
• Procedural Fairness
• Gross Irregularity
• Misconduct By Commissioner
• Legal-representation-in-ccma

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others v Law Society of the Northern Provinces (005/13)

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others v Law Society of the Northern Provinces (005/13) [2013] ZASCA 118; [2013] 11 BLLR 1057 (SCA); [2014] 1 All SA 125 (SCA); 2014 (2) SA 321 (SCA); (2013) 34 ILJ 2779 (SCA) (20 September 2013)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

005/13

Judges

Nugent, Malan, Wallis, Van der Merwe, Swain

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that rule 25(1)(c) of the CCMA rules, which limits the right to legal representation in arbitration proceedings concerning dismissals for misconduct or incapacity, is not unconstitutional. The rule is rationally connected to the legitimate government purpose of providing speedy, inexpensive, and informal dispute resolution for unfair dismissals. The limitation is the product of a historical compromise among social partners and is consistent with the Constitution. There is no absolute right to legal representation in administrative tribunals, and the subrule pr…

Source excerpt

• Legal Representation In Ccma
• Rationality Review
• Section 9 Equality
• Section 22 Freedom Of Trade
• Section 34 Access To Court
• Administrative Action

Road Accident Fund v Commission for Conciliation Mediation And Arbitration and Others (J1779/2010)

Road Accident Fund v Commission for Conciliation Mediation And Arbitration and Others (J1779/2010) [2010] ZALCJHB 362 (7 September 2010)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J1779/2010

Judge

Francis

The court found that the urgency claimed by the applicant was self-created and not justified. The delays in bringing the application were inadequately explained and resulted from the applicant's own choices regarding legal representation. The court held that intervention in uncompleted arbitration proceedings should be rare and only justified by grave injustice, which was not established in this case. The dispute was not complex and did not warrant deviation from the default position of informal and expeditious resolution without legal representation. The applicant failed to establish a prima…

Source excerpt

• Urgent Interdict
• Legal Representation In Ccma
• Review Of Interlocutory Ruling
• Condonation
• Unfair Dismissal

Tiger Brands Field Services v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration (P334/04)

Tiger Brands Field Services v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration (P334/04) [2006] ZALC 45; [2006] 7 BLLR 694 (LC) (15 March 2006)

Court

Labour Court

Case number

P334/04

Judge

Cele

The court found that although the arbitrator erred in his approach to permitting legal representation, the error was not material enough to constitute a gross irregularity or to deny the applicant a fair hearing. The dispute was not complex, did not involve public interest, and both parties were adequately represented. The arbitrator's findings on the substantive and procedural fairness of the dismissal were rational and justified by the evidence. The charges against the third respondent were correctly understood and applied, and there was no evidence of bias or misconduct sufficient to warra…

Source excerpt

• Review Of Arbitration Award
• Misappropriation Of Funds
• Procedural Fairness
• Substantive Fairness
• Legal Representation In Ccma
• Disciplinary Procedure

Norman Tsie Taxis v Pooe and Others (J 1782/03)

Norman Tsie Taxis v Pooe and Others (J 1782/03) [2004] ZALC 2; [2004] 3 BLLR 258 (LC) (21 January 2004)

Court

Labour Court

Case number

J 1782/03

Judge

A Van Niekerk

The court held that there is no constitutional or common law basis for an absolute right to legal representation in CCMA arbitration proceedings. Section 140(1) of the Labour Relations Act, as it stood in August 2003, provided a discretion to commissioners to permit legal representation in defined circumstances, taking into account the seriousness and complexity of the matter, the existence and nature of any questions of law, the public interest, and the comparative ability of the parties. This discretion is consistent with the requirements of a fair hearing under the Constitution and the com…

Source excerpt

• Legal Representation In Ccma
• Constitutional Right To Fair Hearing
• Commissioner Discretion
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Unfair Dismissal
• Administrative Action