[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-502635-105":59,"doc-detail-502635-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","extracts-ccma-rules-238","Extracts-CCMA-Rules-238","","Extracts discuss the CCMA’s jurisdiction in relation to other legislation and explain how commissioners may defer determining jurisdictional factors when evidence is required. The text outlines the general principle that a referring party must prove CCMA jurisdiction before conciliation, while also addressing exceptions and limits on deferral. It details bias disclosure and the standard for impartiality, and summarizes labour court findings on rule 14, including timing for certificates and which challenges are “true” jurisdictional issues.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/extracts-ccma-rules-238/502635/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/extracts-ccma-rules-238/502635.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Alex Sinclair","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-15","2026-10-03",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":39},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What general principle governs proof of CCMA jurisdiction before conciliation?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"Rule 14 provides that the commissioner must require the referring party to prove CCMA jurisdiction to conciliate the dispute before engaging in conciliation. The general principle has a stated exception where the commissioner has discretion to defer jurisdictional issues to arbitration if evidence is required.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"When may a CCMA commissioner defer jurisdictional issues, and what are the limits?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"A commissioner may defer determining jurisdictional factors when the determination requires evidence, and may have discretion to defer jurisdictional issues to arbitration. However, the text states that rule 14 does not permit such deference to the labour court and that the commissioner is obliged to determine the jurisdictional issue(s) if adjudication before the labour court is required.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"How is bias assessed for CCMA commissioners and what must be disclosed?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"The text states the bias test is not only whether the commissioner was in fact biased, but whether the conduct would lead a reasonable litigant to doubt impartiality. It also notes that commissioners must disclose any interest or relationship likely to affect impartiality or create a perception of partiality, and that conciliators should remain objective to avoid any perception of bias.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},502635,1791142236,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":39,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":29,"language":139,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144},1099523882182,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_6f874abed73319feea01a86fa6f0fab8","The CCMA may also be clothed with jurisdiction in terms of other legislation such as the Extension of Security of Tenure Act 135 and labour questions arising from disputes about pension and provident fund matters in terms of the Pension Funds Act.136  \n3.  Commissioner may defer determining presence of jurisdictional factors if same requires evidence  \nThe general principle contained in rule 14 of the CCMA rules is that the commissioner must require the referring party to prove that the CCMA has jurisdiction to conciliate the dispute by means of conciliation before it engages in such activity.137 The exception to the general principle is that the commissioner has a discretion to defer all jurisdictional issues to arbitration if such issues require evidence. The wording of rule 14 of the CCMA rules does, however, not permit such deference to take place to the labour court and the viewpoint is thus held that, if the issue in dispute is to be determined by adjudication before the labour court, such CCMA commissioner does not have the aforesaid discretion and, indeed, is obliged to determine the jurisdictional issue(s) .  \n135 62 of 1997. Section 8 regulates the termination of a right of residence and inter alia provides:  \n‘(2) The right of residence of an occupier who is an employee and whose right of residence arises solely from an employment agreement, may be terminated if the occupier resigns from employment or is dismissed in accordance with the provisions of the Labour Relations Act.  \n(3) Any dispute over whether an occupier’s employment has terminated as contemplated in subsection (2), shall be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of the Labour Relations Act, and the termination shall take effect when any dispute over the termination has been determined in accordance with that Act.’  \nSee further Malan v Bulbring NO and Others (2004) 25 ILJ 1737 (LC); [2004] 10 BLLR 1010 (LC), where the labour court reviewed and set aside the CCMA’s refusal to entertain the dismissal dispute on the basis that, in circumstances where a farm labourer is entitled to housing at a nominal rental, the right to residence arises out of employment, the breach of housing rules constitutes employment related misconduct, and not an eviction dispute, and therefore the dismissal dispute must therefore be dealt with in terms ofthe LRA  \n136 24 of 1956; Armscor v Murphy NO 1999 (4) SA 755 (C), where the court held that disputes of this nature will not fall within the jurisdiction of the Pension Fund Adjudicator  \n137 Also, such commissioner must disclose any relevant previous experience or relationship with individuals representing the parties, whether in a personal or professional capacity. The test for bias isnot only whether the commissioner was in fact biased but whether the conduct complained of would lead a reasonable litigant to doubt the impartiality of such person -BTR Industries SA (Pty) Ltd v MAWU (1992) 13 ILJ 803 (A) . The code of conduct for CCMA commissioners also requires commissioners, per item 4, to ‘disclose any interest or relationship likely to affect their impartiality or which might create a perception of partiality’ – see further Sasol Infrachem v Sefafe and Others (2015) 36 ILJ 655 (LAC); [2015] 2 BLLR 115 (LAC) . It is therefore required that conciliators should, at all times, remain objective and take special care not to create any perception of bias – see, inter alia, Scholtz v CCMA and Others (2015) ZALCCT 45 of 25 June 2015; SACCAWU and Others v Irvine and Johnson (Pty) Ltd (Sea Foods Division Fish Processing) (2000) 21 ILJ 330 (LAC); SACCAWU v Irvine and Johnson (Pty) Ltd (Sea Foods Division Fish Processing) (2000) 21 ILJ 1583 (CC)  \n4. Bombardier Transportation (Pty) Ltd v Mtiya NO and Others [2010]  \n8 BLLR 840 (LC)  \nThe labour court, per Van Niekerk J, considered rule 14 of the CCMA rules as it stood before 1 April 2015 and, inter alia, made the following findings:  \n(a) a conciliating commissioner is bound to i","cbCaip6gkVOjbrnR","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaip6gkVOjbrnR","pdf",583353,"English","# Jurisdiction and related legislation\n## General principle and commissioner discretion\n# Rule 14, evidence, and referral timing\n## Certificate of outcome and non-resolution\n## True jurisdictional challenges","[{\"question\":\"What general principle governs proof of CCMA jurisdiction before conciliation?\",\"answer\":\"Rule 14 provides that the commissioner must require the referring party to prove CCMA jurisdiction to conciliate the dispute before engaging in conciliation. The general principle has a stated exception where the commissioner has discretion to defer jurisdictional issues to arbitration if evidence is required.\"},{\"question\":\"When may a CCMA commissioner defer jurisdictional issues, and what are the limits?\",\"answer\":\"A commissioner may defer determining jurisdictional factors when the determination requires evidence, and may have discretion to defer jurisdictional issues to arbitration. However, the text states that rule 14 does not permit such deference to the labour court and that the commissioner is obliged to determine the jurisdictional issue(s) if adjudication before the labour court is required.\"},{\"question\":\"How is bias assessed for CCMA commissioners and what must be disclosed?\",\"answer\":\"The text states the bias test is not only whether the commissioner was in fact biased, but whether the conduct would lead a reasonable litigant to doubt impartiality. It also notes that commissioners must disclose any interest or relationship likely to affect impartiality or create a perception of partiality, and that conciliators should remain objective to avoid any perception of bias.\"}]","Extracts-CCMA-Rules-238 | PDF",1791038954,15]