IN THE INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COURT OF
NUMBER IRC 79 OF 2005
Zibelu Banda (Ms); Chairperson
Officer for the Respondent
Ntambalika; Assisting the
for dismissal- Misconduct- Willful disobedience of company
regulations and procedures-Flouting company
Opportunity to be heard- and
defend oneself-Interference with employers decision.
hearing the applicant and upon hearing the respondent the court finds
that applicant as
Driver was supposed to carry out instructions given to him by his
seniors from time to time. However it came out in
evidence that the
Applicant on several occasions defied his superiors instructions
to the detriment of the operations of the
disobedience of company rules and regulations is serious misconduct
warranting summary dismissal; see Mussa V
Securicor (Mw) Ltd [Matter No. IRC 2/2000
(unreported)] and Mendulo V Malawi Revenue
Authority [Matter No. IRC 161/ 2003
company procedures has been held in this court to constitute valid
ground for dismissal, see Nzangaya V
Unitrans Malawi Ltd [Matter
Number IRC 32 of 2003 (unreported).
with Employers Decision
It has been held in this
Court that decisions of employers should not be tampered with if
there is no allegation that the process
to arrive at the decision was
not fair. See the case of Kachingwe &others V Southern
Bottlers Mw Ltd [Matter No.162 of 2003(unreported)].
In that case the Court quoted with approval a holding of the Labour
Appeal Court of South Africa
in the case of County Fair Foods
(Pty) Ltd V CCMA & others 11BLLR 1117 (LAC), per
with the employers sanction is only justified in the case of
..unfairness. However, the decision
of the arbitrator as to
the fairness or unfairness of the employers decision is not
reached with reference to the evidential
material that was before
the employer at the time of its decision but on the basis of all
evidential material before the arbitrator.
was heard in the instant case that the applicant had discussions with
his employer, on his conduct. He also appeared before a
hearing prior to his dismissal. There is no compelling reason to
interfere with the respondents decision.
finds that the respondent complied with the law. The dismissal was
fair according to section 57 of the Employment Act.
dismissed in its entirety.
aggrieved by this decision is at liberty to appeal to the High Court
within 30 days of this judgment.
day of December 2006 at BLANTYRE.