From Sidumo to Dunsmuir the test for review of CCMA arbitration awards

• Main Author: Fergus, Emma
• Other Authors: Rycroft, Alan
• Format: Doctoral Thesis
• Language: English
• Published: University of Cape Town 2014
• Subjects: Commercial Law
• Online Access: http://hdl.handle.net/11427/4607

Includes abstract. === Includes bibliographical references. === This thesis seeks to identify the test for judicial review of arbitration awards issued by the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration ('CCMA'). Currently, that test is set out in section 145 of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 ('LRA'), read with the Constitutional Court's decision in Sidumo & another v Rustenburg Platinum Mines Ltd & others [2007] 12 BLLR 1097 (CC). In terms of Sidumo, section 145 of the LRA has been suffused by the standard of reasonableness, consistently with the right to just administrative action found in section 33 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 ('the Constitution'). In search of a clear formulation of the test, an extensive examination of South African case law on the subject is undertaken. Thereafter, relevant principles of judicial review in South Africa in the administrative sphere generally are considered. Finally, an assessment of Canadian case law and commentary in this field is conducted. The conclusion to this thesis proposes a revised test for review of CCMA awards. The principal research findings begin by recognising the significance of efficiency, accessibility, flexibility and informality to ensuring fair and efficacious labour dispute resolution. The implication of this is that the test for review of CCMA awards should not be too exacting. Still, section 33 of the Constitution cannot be ignored and a broader ambit of review may therefore be necessary in certain instances. In fact, to maintain legal certainty, intrusive review may sometimes be crucial. These factors must be balanced when formulating a reliable and practical approach to review of CCMA awards. A key finding of this thesis is that – ostensibly due to the complexity of doing so – the Labour Courts have struggled to apply the current test for review consistently, fairly or predictably.