Ramanyimi v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1013/13) [2017] ZALCJHB 230 (12 June 2017)

30 Reportability

Brief Summary

Labour Law — Leave to appeal — Application for leave to appeal against dismissal of review of arbitration award — Applicant’s dismissal found substantively fair but procedurally unfair, with compensation awarded — Third respondent satisfied the award by payment accepted by the applicant — Principle of peremption applied, leading to dismissal of leave to appeal — No reasonable prospect of success on appeal.

About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: Johannesburg Labour Court, Johannesburg
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: Johannesburg Labour Court, Johannesburg
>>
2017
>>
[2017] ZALCJHB 230
|

|

Ramanyimi v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1013/13) [2017] ZALCJHB 230 (12 June 2017)

THE
LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG
JUDGMENT
Not
Reportable
JR1013/13
In
the matter between:
ROFHIWA
RAMANYIMI
Applicant
and
COMMISSION
FOR CONCILIATION,
MEDIATION
AND
ARBITRATION
First
Respondent
PRETORIUS,
D.
A.
Second
Respondent
NATIONAL
HOUSING FINANCE
CORPORATION
Third
Respondent
Heard:
12 June 2017 In Chambers
JUDGMENT: APPLICATION
LEAVE TO APPEAL
GUSH
J
[1]
The applicant in this matter applies for leave to appeal against the
judgment handed down on 6 September 2016 in which judgment
I
dismissed the applicants application to review and set aside the
arbitration award.
[2]
The arbitrator had found that the applicant had been substantively
fairly dismissed but the procedure was unfair. The applicant
had been
awarded compensation in an amount of R45,166.66 by the arbitrator as
compensation for the unfair procedure.
[3]
During the hearing of the review it became clear that the third
respondent had in fact satisfied the award by paying the applicant,

the amount set out in the award which payment the applicant had
accepted.
This
was confirmed by Mr Malatji, who appeared on behalf of the
applicant.
[4]
I concluded that the principle of peremption applied and dismissed
the applicant’s application.
[5]
I have read and have considered the applicant’s grounds of
appeal. I am not persuaded that there is any possibility of
another
court coming to a different decision.
[7]
In the circumstances, I make the following order.
The
applicant’s application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
__________________
Gush J
Judge
of the Labour Court of South Africa