NUM obo Mayime Dalton Majebe v Civil & General Contractors

Mr Mayime Dalton Majebe was dismissed by Civil & General Contractors on 8 December 2006 for alleged misconduct. His union, NUM, referred an unfair dismissal dispute to the CCMA on 2 January 2007. On 19 June 2007, a CCMA commissioner found the dismissal substantively unfair and ordered the employer to reinstate Mr Majebe retrospectively with back-pay. In August 2007, the employer launched a review application to set aside the arbitration award, which was never finalised. After nearly seven years, on 14 January 2014, NUM applied to the Labour Court in terms of section 158(1)(c) of the LRA to make the arbitration award an order of court. The employer opposed the application on the basis that the award had prescribed. Relying on the Labour Appeal Court decision in Myathaza (LAC), the Labour Court held that the award had prescribed and dismissed the application. NUM appealed to the Labour Appeal Court.

The appeal was upheld. The Labour Court’s order dismissing the section 158(1)(c) application on the basis of prescription was set aside and substituted with an order dismissing the respondent’s prescription point. The matter was referred back to the Labour Court to determine the merits of the application to make the arbitration award an order of court. No order as to costs was made.

This judgment is significant for clarifying, at Labour Appeal Court level, the impact of the Constitutional Court’s decision in Pieman’s Pantry on the prescription of arbitration awards under the LRA. It confirms that arbitration awards for reinstatement and back-pay are debts subject to prescription, but that prescription is interrupted by CCMA referrals and remains interrupted while review proceedings are pending. The case contributes to legal certainty in an area previously marked by conflicting authority following Myathaza.