The Constitutionality of rule 25 of the CCMA Rules

Abstract

This study focuses on the impact of legal representation in general as well as on CCMA proceedings involving unfair dismissals relating to conduction on capacity. The study also touches on the common law position before the enactment of Labour Relations Act 28 of 1956 and Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995. Rule 25 of CCMA rules which makes provision that legal representation at CCMA arbitration proceedings relating to fairness of dismissal and party has alleged that the reason for dismissal relates to the employees conduct on capacity, the party is not entitled to be represented by a legal practitioner. The dissertation analyses the effect of this provision on the Constitutional rights to legal representations well as rights relating to fair procedure. Refusal of legal representation in certain instances is justified in the right of legislative requirements on obligation placed particularly on the arbitrator legislative measures which, justifies refusal of legal representation at CCMA that cannot be imposed without giving consideration to the Constitution. The study will highlight the South African case on position with regards to legal representation at CCMA. A literature study will be done using current and researched sources such as textbooks, law journals, and legislation, case law, conferences papers and internet sources. Different rights will be weighed up through literature sources.