The respondent submitted in closing that the dismissal should be upheld as fair, while the applicant submitted to the contrary. SUMMARY & ANALYSIS OF EVIDENCE The following gave evidence for the respondent: chairperson of the ………….(the disciplinary hearing. He has held the substantive post of director of ……Division for 5 years and has been with the respondent for 34 years); and …………. (foreman rigger for 9 months); Only the applicant gave evidence in support of his case. The observation must be made at this stage that the applicant, represented by an attorney, did not put his version to the respondent’s witnesses on critical issues. As such a number of issues remained unchallenged. When asked by me, the applicant stated that he had not informed his attorney of those issues. I find that an applicant who fails to brief his attorney fully of all relevant issues cannot be heard to complain when findings are made against him in terms of the rules of evidence. The applicant strained his credibility when he complained that the respondent had not conducted workshops to its employees about the dangers of receiving gifts and bribes. The evidence on the disputed procedural issues and my findings thereon are as follows: Whether the chairperson was partial and biased: The applicant’s evidence was that the chairperson was partial and biased because he also worked for the respondent. I reject that proposition for the following reasons: It was common cause that the chairperson had never had any interaction with the applicant before; It was common cause that the chairperson works in a different business unit of the respondent; It was the chairperson’s evidence that he had, at the disciplinary hearing, asked the applicant whether he was happy with him being the chairperson and that the response received was in the affirmative. This was not challenged when the chairperson was cross-examined. However when he gave evidence the applicant stated that he was not
The respondent submitted in closing that the dismissal should be upheld as fair, while the applicant submitted to the contrary. SUMMARY & ANALYSIS OF EVIDENCE The following gave evidence for the respondent: ………….(the chairperson of the disciplinary hearing. He has held the substantive post of director of ……Division for 5 years and has been with the respondent for 34 years); and …………. (foreman rigger for 9 months); Only the applicant gave evidence in support of his case. The observation must be made at this stage that the applicant, represented by an attorney, did not put his version to the respondent’s witnesses on critical issues. As such a number of issues remained unchallenged. When asked by me, the applicant stated that he had not informed his attorney of those issues. I find that an applicant who fails to brief his attorney fully of all relevant issues cannot be heard to complain when findings are made against him in terms of the rules of evidence. The applicant strained his credibility when he complained that the respondent had not conducted workshops to its employees about the dangers of receiving gifts and bribes. The evidence on the disputed procedural issues and my findings thereon are as follows: Whether the chairperson was partial and biased: The applicant’s evidence was that the chairperson was partial and biased because he also worked for the respondent. I reject that proposition for the following reasons: It was common cause that the chairperson had never had any interaction with the applicant before; It was common cause that the chairperson works in a different business unit of the respondent; It was the chairperson’s evidence that he had, at the disciplinary hearing, asked the applicant whether he was happy with him being the chairperson and that the response received was in the affirmative. This was not challenged when the chairperson was cross-examined. However when he gave evidence the applicant stated that he was not