boarding passes charges, his defence is best summed up in his instructions put to Ms Kate du Toit , a witness for Air Namibia (infra), in the following terms: did not have anything to do with issuing of tickets or boarding passes . . . He was ‘He implicated in that, there is no evidence. He is not the person whose code is there. That is why his version is he was not involved.’ The evidence [17] Air Namibia led several witnesses at the arbitration hearing in support of the allegations of misconduct against Mr Andima. Mr Andima testified on his own behalf and also called some witnesses to support his version of events. I will next summarise the salient aspects of the evidence. [18] There is very little by way of disagreement between the protagonists when it comes to the facts surrounding the petty cash box. In my view, the summary I gave above is sufficient for the purpose of coming to a conclusion one way or the other in this appeal. Ester Munjondjo [19] Ms Munjondjo, who worked as a cleaner at the Eros airport, testified at the arbitration that she Mr Andima very well. She would assist him by ironing his clothes. She testified that she was on friendly terms with him. One Sunday and on her off-day, Mr Andima asked her to deliver an envelope to three people at the HKIA. She did not know the content of the envelope and was simply told by Mr Andima that the
boarding passes charges, his defence is best summed up in his instructions put to Ms Kate du Toit , a witness for Air Namibia (infra), in the following terms: ‘He did not have anything to do with issuing of tickets or boarding passes . . . He was implicated in that, there is no evidence. He is not the person whose code is there. That is why his version is he was not involved.’ The evidence [17] Air Namibia led several witnesses at the arbitration hearing in support of the allegations of misconduct against Mr Andima. Mr Andima testified on his own behalf and also called some witnesses to support his version of events. I will next summarise the salient aspects of the evidence. [18] There is very little by way of disagreement between the protagonists when it comes to the facts surrounding the petty cash box. In my view, the summary I gave above is sufficient for the purpose of coming to a conclusion one way or the other in this appeal. Ester Munjondjo [19] Ms Munjondjo, who worked as a cleaner at the Eros airport, testified at the arbitration that she Mr Andima very well. She would assist him by ironing his clothes. She testified that she was on friendly terms with him. One Sunday and on her off-day, Mr Andima asked her to deliver an envelope to three people at the HKIA. She did not know the content of the envelope and was simply told by Mr Andima that the
Andima%20v%20Air%20Namibia%20(Pty)%20Ltd%20(SA%2040%20-%202015)[2017]%20NASC%20(12%20May%202017).docx