CCT97/07

[2009] ZACC 6

2009 (4) SA 529 (CC)

2009 (6) BCLR 527 (CC)

O'Regan J Majority judgment

Kroon AJ dissenting judgment

Ngcobo J dissenting judgment

20 March 2009

http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/3431

Application for leave to appeal to CC against a decision of the SCA: Lufuno Mphaphuli & Associates (Pty) Ltd v Andrews and Another [2007] ZASCA 143; 2008 (2) SA 448 (SCA); 2008 (7) BCLR 725 (SCA). The SCA upheld a judgment of the Pretoria High Court: Bopanang Construction CC v Lufuno Mphaphuli & Associates (Pty) Ltd; Lufuno Mphaphuli & Associates (Pty) Ltd v Andrews and Another, Case Nos 27225/04 and 33188/2004, North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, 22 February 2006, unreported.

Appeal from the SCA regarding decision of a private arbitrator. O'Regan J (for the majority, Langa CJ, Mokgoro, Van der Westhuizen and Yacoob JJ concurring) held that section 34 of the Constiution did not apply directly to private prosecutions, although arbitration agreements need to be in line with the Constitution. The arbitration had been fairly conducted in line with the intention of the parties and the conduct of the arbitrator was not so grossly irregular as to warrant the setting aside of the agreement. The appeal was dismissed. Kroon AJ) held that section 34 did apply to private arbitrations. That there had been gross irregularities in the behavior of the arbitrator and that the award should be set aside. Ngcobo dissented, holding that the matter did not raise constitutional issues, and that it was not in the interests of justice to grant the appeal. Majority: O'Regan (Langa CJ, Mokgoro J, Van der Westhuizen J and Yacoob J concurring) Minority: per Kroon AJ (Jaftha J and Nkabinde J concurring)