SA Social Security Agency v Nehawu obo Punzi (C233/14) [2015] ZALCCT 35 ; (2015) ILJ 2345 ; [2015] JOL 33217 (30 April 2015) per Rabkin-Naicker J.

A commissioner found that in terms of s 186(2) of the LRA 14 employees had been unfairly suspended even though it was only as a precaution and not as a disciplinary measure.  R600 was awarded to each of them.  But the Labour Court on review set aside that award and remitted the dispute to the CCMA.  The award was not based on a stated case nor was there any oral evidence.  It was held that it is not permissible for commissioners to adopt such an approach as it meant that the directions given by the Labour Appeal Court in  Gold Fields Mining SA (Pty) Ltd (Kloof Gold Mine) v CCMA [2014] 1 BLLR 20 (LAC) would be flouted.

“[5] I fail to comprehend how a dispute which hinges on the fairness of the conduct of an employer can be decided (in the absence of a stated case) without parties giving oral evidence. A decision made in such a way means that the Labour court must answer all the following questions in the negative:

“(i) In terms of his or her duty to deal with the matter with the minimum of legal formalities, did the process that the arbitrator employ give the parties a full opportunity to have their say in respect of the dispute?

(ii) Did the arbitrator identify the dispute he or she was required to arbitrate? (This may in certain cases only become clear after both parties have led their evidence.)

(iii) Did the arbitrator understand the nature of the dispute he or she was required to arbitrate?”

(iv) Did he or she deal with the substantial merits of the dispute?

(v) Is the arbitrator’s decision one that another decision maker could reasonably have arrived at based on the evidence?”