Groenewald v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others

The applicant, Lana Groenewald, was employed as an Office Manager by Times Square Marketing (Pty) Ltd with effect from October 2021. Possession of a valid Fidelity Fund Certificate (FFC) was an inherent requirement of the position. During interviews in September 2021, the applicant represented that she was in the process of renewing her FFC and that it would take only a few days. After commencing employment, it emerged that her Estate Agency Affairs Board (EAAB) account was blocked due to outstanding audits and non-compliance, meaning she did not have a valid FFC for 2021 and could not obtain one quickly. She was charged with gross dishonesty/misrepresentation relating to the validity of her FFC and dismissed in November 2021. The CCMA commissioner found the dismissal substantively and procedurally fair. The applicant then brought a review application under section 145 of the Labour Relations Act, alleging misconduct, gross irregularity, and that the award was one no reasonable decision-maker could reach.

The review application was dismissed and the CCMA arbitration award finding the dismissal procedurally and substantively fair was upheld.

The case reinforces the high threshold for reviewing CCMA arbitration awards under section 145 of the Labour Relations Act. It confirms that misrepresentation relating to an inherent job requirement, even where framed as a failure to be fully candid rather than outright dishonesty, can justify dismissal. The judgment also reiterates the distinction between review and appeal and underscores judicial deference to commissioners’ factual findings when the outcome is reasonable.