ASSIGNMENT QUESTION Study the case Moloantoa v CCMA and Others (JR1281/19) [2021] ZALCMPP 1; (2021) 42 ILJ 2259 (LC); [2021] 8 BLLR 827 (LC) (31 May 2021) and write a two-page legal opinion about the case. Your legal opinion must have the following - • Summary of the facts of the case (2) • Issue(s) in dispute in the case (1) • The Court’s decision (1) • At the end provide a well-supported legal opinion which should cover the importance of the case (importance of the case (this is important as it carries more marks). (a) Summary of facts: Moloantoa was employed by Eskom & travelled from Medupi Power Plant located at Lephalale to attend a training course in Midrand. She travelled as a passenger in a coworker’s private vehicle & the co-worker charged her an amount of R400.00 for the travel. Upon her return she lodged a claim for reimbursement of the travel costs. Apparently 713 kilometers were inputted on the electronic system in place, which the system automatically calculated the amount to be R2 584.80. The claim was approved by her manager and was paid to her. Ultimately following a tip off regarding fraudulent travel claims, a forensic investigation was launched in which Moloantoa was charged with misconduct as she did not come clean and was referred to a disciplinary hearing. Usage of disciplinary hearing did not automatically imply that dismissal will be the only suitable sanction. Other sanctions provided for in the Procedure were possible. The Procedure was negotiated with NUMSA, NUM and Solidarity. The chairperson of the disciplinary hearing of Moloantoa, Mr TD Zulu (Zulu) found Moloantoa guilty as charged and after considering mitigating and aggravating circumstances, he imposed one of the sanctions provided for in the Procedure – suspension without pay for seven working days. Moloantoa served her sanction. Upon her return, Rudi Van Der Wal (Wal), the General Manager concluded that Moloantoa was grossly dishonest and the gravity of this offence is that it is a serious fraud. He then imposed a sanction of summary dismissal. NUMSA and Moloantoa were displeased thereby and referred a dispute to the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) alleging an unfair dismissal. Conciliation failed to resolve the dispute. (b) The issue(s) in dispute:  Whether an employer can legally revoke its earlier decision to impose a lesser sanction  Whether the dismissal of Moloantoa was substantively fair