100% tevredenheidsgarantie Direct beschikbaar na je betaling Lees online óf als PDF Geen vaste maandelijkse kosten
logo-home
Eerder door jou gezocht
Eerder door jou gezocht
logo
MRL3702 Assignment 1 Semester 2 2024 | Due 16 August 2024 €2,67
In winkelwagen
Snel navigeren naar
Voorbeeld
  2.  
  3. University Of South Africa (Unisa)
  4.  
  5. LABOUR LAW (MRL3702)

Tentamen (uitwerkingen)

MRL3702 Assignment 1 Semester 2 2024 | Due 16 August 2024

2 beoordelingen
 12 keer verkocht
  • Vak
  • LABOUR LAW (MRL3702)
  • Instelling
  • University Of South Africa (Unisa)
  • Boek
  • Essential Labour Law

COMPULSORY ASSIGNMENTS: SEMESTER 2 Study the case Woolworths (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (PA12/2020) [2021] ZALAC 49; [2022] 3 BLLR 296 (LAC); (2022) 43 ILJ 839 (LAC)) and write a two-page legal opinion about the case. Your legal opinion must have ...

[Meer zien]

Voorbeeld 2 van de 5  pagina's

Document informatie

  • 12 juli 2024
  • 5
  • 2023/2024
  • Tentamen (uitwerkingen)
  • Vragen en antwoorden

Onderwerpen

  • mrl3702 assignment 1 semester 2 2024

Gekoppeld boek

book image

Titel boek:

Auteur(s):

  • Uitgave:
  • ISBN:
  • Druk:

Geschreven voor

  • University of South Africa (Unisa)
  • LABOUR LAW (MRL3702)
Alle documenten voor dit vak (52)

2  beoordelingen

review-writer-avatar

Door: mahlatsejoan6 • 6 maanden geleden

review-writer-avatar

Door: thulilekhanyile75 • 5 maanden geleden

Verkoper

avatar-seller
Aimark94

Ontvangen beoordelingen

Voorbeeld van de inhoud

, PLEASE USE THIS DOCUMENT AS A GUIDE TO ANSWER YOUR ASSIGNMENT


Please note that the author of this document will not responsibility for any plagiarizing you
commit.

Study the case Woolworths (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration
and Others (PA12/2020) [2021] ZALAC 49; [2022] 3 BLLR 296 (LAC); (2022) 43 ILJ 839 (LAC))
and write a two-page legal opinion about the case. Your legal opinion must have the following -
 Summary of the facts of the case
 Issue(s) in dispute in the case
 The court’s decision
 At the end provide a well-supported legal opinion which should cover the importance of the
case (importance of the case (this is important as it carries more marks).

Summary of the Facts of the Case
The case Woolworths (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and
Others revolves around an incident that occurred on 9 June 2018. The third respondent, Mr. Brian
Hilton Alexander, who was employed by Woolworths (Pty) Ltd, informed his employer that he was
ill and would not be able to attend work. Despite his claim of illness, Mr. Alexander attended a rugby
match in Port Elizabeth, which involved traveling a considerable distance from his residence in
Jeffreys Bay. His manager, upon his return to work, inquired about his whereabouts during his
absence, and Mr. Alexander admitted to attending the rugby match despite claiming sick leave. This
led to an internal investigation and a subsequent disciplinary hearing where Mr. Alexander was
charged with gross misconduct for abusing sick leave. Following the disciplinary process, he was
dismissed from his employment.

Issues in Dispute in the Case
The central issue in dispute was whether the dismissal of Mr. Alexander for abusing sick leave and
attending a rugby match instead of reporting to work was substantively and procedurally fair. The
secondary issue was whether there was an existing policy that clearly prohibited such conduct and
whether Mr. Alexander’s actions amounted to dishonesty that justified termination of employment.

The Court’s Decision
The initial arbitration by the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA)
found Mr. Alexander's dismissal to be both substantively and procedurally unfair, ordering his
reinstatement. The Labour Court, upon review, upheld the finding of substantive unfairness but
noted procedural fairness. However, on appeal, the Labour Appeal Court (LAC) overturned the
decisions of both the CCMA and the Labour Court. The LAC found that Mr. Alexander's actions
were dishonest and justified dismissal. The LAC emphasized that the employment relationship's trust
had been irreparably damaged due to Mr. Alexander's dishonesty and previous disciplinary issues.
Thus, the LAC upheld the dismissal as both substantively and procedurally fair, setting aside the
orders of the lower courts.

Dit zijn jouw voordelen als je samenvattingen koopt bij Stuvia:

Bewezen kwaliteit door reviews

Bewezen kwaliteit door reviews

Studenten hebben al meer dan 850.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet jij zeker dat je de beste keuze maakt!

In een paar klikken geregeld

In een paar klikken geregeld

Geen gedoe — betaal gewoon eenmalig met iDeal, Bancontact of creditcard en je bent klaar. Geen abonnement nodig.

Focus op de essentie

Focus op de essentie

Studenten maken samenvattingen voor studenten. Dat betekent: actuele inhoud waar jij écht wat aan hebt. Geen overbodige details!

Veelgestelde vragen

Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?

Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.

Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?

Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.

Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?

Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper Aimark94. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.

Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?

Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €2,67. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.

Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?

4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 69052 samenvattingen verkocht

Opgericht in 2010, al 15 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen

Start met verkopen
€2,67  12x  verkocht
  • (2)
In winkelwagen
Toegevoegd