MRL3702 Assignment 1
Semester 1 2023
, Shoprite Checkers (Pty) Ltd v Chiloane and Others (JR1280/20) [2021]
ZALCMPP 10 (5 November 2021))
Facts of the case
On 11 March 2020, Mr Chiloane (employee) employed by Shoprite
Checkers was dismissed due to charges of unacceptable
absenteeism/poor time keeping. This dismissal came after a series of
misconduct relating to poor time-keeping and absenteeism. When the
misconduct became incessant, the company imposed final written
warnings and on each occasion stated in the warnings that future
misconduct will lead to further action possible dismissal from the
company.
Aggrieved by the outcome of the disciplinary hearing, he referred an
unfair dismissal dispute to the CCMA. The commissioner found that the
dismissal was substantively unfair and ordered that he be re-instated
back to his position with full back pay.
Shoprite filed a review application in which the applicant seeks an order
to review and set aside the award issued by the commissioner.
Issue(s) in dispute in the case
Was the dismissal of Mr Chiloane dismissal was substantively fair?
The Court’s decision
The arbitration award issued by CCMA on is reviewed and set aside.
The decision of the third respondent is substituted with a
decision that the dismissal of the applicant (first respondent in
this matter) was both procedurally and substantively fair.
No order as to costs.
Legal opinion
Section 192 of the LRA provides that once dismissal is established, the
onus is on the employer to show that the dismissal is fair. Section 34 of
the Constitution provides that everyone has the right to have any dispute
that can be resolved by the
application of law decided in a fair public hearing before a court or, where
Semester 1 2023
, Shoprite Checkers (Pty) Ltd v Chiloane and Others (JR1280/20) [2021]
ZALCMPP 10 (5 November 2021))
Facts of the case
On 11 March 2020, Mr Chiloane (employee) employed by Shoprite
Checkers was dismissed due to charges of unacceptable
absenteeism/poor time keeping. This dismissal came after a series of
misconduct relating to poor time-keeping and absenteeism. When the
misconduct became incessant, the company imposed final written
warnings and on each occasion stated in the warnings that future
misconduct will lead to further action possible dismissal from the
company.
Aggrieved by the outcome of the disciplinary hearing, he referred an
unfair dismissal dispute to the CCMA. The commissioner found that the
dismissal was substantively unfair and ordered that he be re-instated
back to his position with full back pay.
Shoprite filed a review application in which the applicant seeks an order
to review and set aside the award issued by the commissioner.
Issue(s) in dispute in the case
Was the dismissal of Mr Chiloane dismissal was substantively fair?
The Court’s decision
The arbitration award issued by CCMA on is reviewed and set aside.
The decision of the third respondent is substituted with a
decision that the dismissal of the applicant (first respondent in
this matter) was both procedurally and substantively fair.
No order as to costs.
Legal opinion
Section 192 of the LRA provides that once dismissal is established, the
onus is on the employer to show that the dismissal is fair. Section 34 of
the Constitution provides that everyone has the right to have any dispute
that can be resolved by the
application of law decided in a fair public hearing before a court or, where
