Lucchini v CCMA | The Award Survived — the Compensation Did Not — Case Law Management Ep 5

An employee of less than six months’ standing gave notice that he intended to resign and join a competitor. Within weeks he faced five charges of misconduct, and within days of the enquiry he was dismissed. The arbitrator found the charges contrived and awarded the maximum the Act permits — twelve months’ remuneration. On review the Labour Court found no misconduct on the part of the arbitrator, no gross irregularity, and nothing unreasonable in the finding of unfairness. It nonetheless reduced the compensation to six months. Lucchini South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1794/22) [2025] ZALCJHB 589, Labour Court, Johannesburg, per Gandidze J, 19 December 2025. Episode 5 of Case Law Management — the series built on the judgments a decision-maker must be able to apply. In this episode: • Liability and remedy as separate determinations — reasonableness on the one, a section 194 discretion on the other • Why a contractual bar on seeking other employment was held contrary to public policy — and section 22 of the Constitution • “Reasonable decision-makers could differ” is not the test — the band of reasonableness applied across four charges • Compensation as a solatium: not damages, not confined to patrimonial loss, and carrying an element of censure • “Just and equitable — to both parties”, and how the Court struck the balance at six months • The capacity in which a representative appears, and the referral to the Legal Practice Council CHAPTERS 0:00 Lucchini v CCMA — cold open 1:10 Liability and remedy are two determinations 1:54 The facts: six months, and five charges 3:00 The chronology: when the charges arrived 3:42 The award under review 4:23 The capacity in which a representative appears 5:17 Six grounds, two standards 5:58 Seeking other employment is not misconduct 7:06 Differing conclusions are not the test 8:09 What the relocation allowance was in fact for 8:57 The review failed upon every ground 9:27 How the twelve months was reasoned 10:23 Compensation is not damages 11:19 Just and equitable — to both parties 12:14 Five propositions for the decision-maker 13:02 Sign-off Produced by Naidoo and Associates Incorporated for CCMA commissioners, and for the attorneys, advocates, employee-relations and human-resources practitioners who appear before them. 🌐 www.naidooinc.co.za 📺 Subscribe — the Case Law Management series continues — @NAInc #LabourLaw #CCMA #EmploymentLaw #LabourCourt #Arbitration #CaseLawManagement #SouthAfricanLaw