BELGOTEX FLOORS (PTY) LTD v CCMA AND OTHERS [2026] ZALCD 18

Date of Judgment & Seat of Court: 17 April 2026; Labour Court of South Africa, Durban

Name of Judge(s): Whitcher J

Summary of Factual Matrix: 

The Third Respondent, Mr Zungu, was dismissed following a disciplinary hearing in which he was found guilty of gross misconduct for striking a female co-worker, Ms Masinga, on the neck. At arbitration, the commissioner, substantially on adverse credibility findings, rejected Ms Masinga's version and that of her supervisor who testified that Zungu admitted pushing her. The commissioner found that even if Zungu had struck Ms Masinga, the circumstances rendered dismissal unfair given his nine years of service, clean disciplinary record, and good reputation. The Applicant sought review of the arbitration award.

Summary of Findings:

"[4] The test in Sidumo dictates the resolution of the controversy, i.e. was the decision one to which no reasonable arbitrator could come on the issues and evidence that served before the commissioner. At the heart of the exercise is a fair reading of the award, in the context of the body of evidence adduced and an even-handed assessment of whether such conclusions are untenable. Only if the conclusion is untenable is a review and setting aside warranted."

"[36] On the face of the transcript, Masinga gave a frank, straightforward and consistent version of her interaction with Zungu. She volunteered upfront that she essentially provoked the situation, by [immaturely] repeatedly unplugging the gun just because she believed it was hers. Her version that Zungu punched her in the neck with two closed fists remained consistent and straightforward and she explained why it was difficult to demonstrate the punch on the person she was called upon to conduct the demonstration and why the punch did not leave a bruise."

"[41] No reasonable commissioner would have considered Masinga's answers as snide comments, let alone a rational basis to make an adverse credibility finding. And no reasonable commissioner would have rationally considered Masinga's alleged emotional state as a basis to make an adverse credibility finding. What is evident is that Masinga was often subjected to questions and propositions that were irrelevant, confusing, argumentative, contradictory and demeaning, the last even by the commissioner."

"[47] Ultimately, a reasonable commissioner would have found that, on a balance of probabilities, Masinga conduct of immaturely unplugging the gun, so enraged Zungu that he struck out in anger, by punching (pushing at) Masinga on the neck with his closed fists, and that the dismissal was substantively fair given the nature of the misconduct and the fact that he was a shopsteward."

As such the Court held that the commissioner's adverse credibility findings against Ms Masinga were fundamentally flawed, being based on: 

(i) subjective opinions falling outside professional purview; 

(ii) undisclosed opinions about Ms Masinga's gender and physical appearance; 

(iii) irrational views about her responses in cross-examination; 

(iv) statements attributed to but not made by witnesses; and 

(v) mischaracterised evidence. 

The commissioner also failed to properly assess Zungu's version, relying on unreliable factors such as his presentation at arbitration rather than the credibility and probability of his version.

Order:

"1. The arbitration award handed down by the Second Respondent under case number KNPM3009-22 dated 14 August 2023 is set aside and substituted with an award that the third respondent's dismissal was substantively fair. 

 2. There is no order as to costs."