Bhengu and Others v G4S Cash Solutions (SA) (Pty) Ltd (34196/2014) [2017] ZAGPPHC 355 (28 March 2017)

Bhengu and Others v G4S Cash Solutions (SA) (Pty) Ltd (34196/2014) [2017] ZAGPPHC 355 (28 March 2017)

The court held that the existence of the novel legal duty asserted by the plaintiffs—namely, a duty on the part of an employer to act fairly in dealings with employees—entails a policy decision and value judgment. Such a determination should only be made after the hearing of evidence at trial and not on exception, which is based solely on the allegations in the particulars of claim. The exception procedure requires the facts pleaded to be accepted as true, and the defendant failed to show that the claim is bad in law. Therefore, the exception was dismissed.

Citation
[2017] ZAGPPHC 355
Parties
Plaintiff: David Bhengu & 52 Others; Defendant: G4S Cash Solutions (SA) (Pty) Ltd
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 March 2017
Case Number
34196/2014
Procedural Posture
Exception Application / Exception to Particulars of Claim; Pre Trial Interlocutory
Outcome
Exception dismissed with costs.
Judges
P.A. Meyer
Legal Topics
Novel Legal Duty, Pure Economic Loss, Vicarious Liability, Dismissal, Strike Action, Common Law Development
Delict Labour Law Novel Legal Duty Pure Economic Loss Vicarious Liability Dismissal Strike Action Common Law Development

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Bhengu & 52 Others

Plaintiff

G4S Cash Solutions (SA) (Pty) Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Exception Application / Exception to Particulars of Claim; Pre Trial Interlocutory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the particulars of claim disclose a cause of action based on a novel legal duty not to act negligently.
  2. 2 Whether South African law recognises a duty on employers to act fairly in dealings with employees beyond statutory protections.
  3. 3 Whether the common law should be developed to recognise such a duty in the context of employment and dismissal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the existence of the novel legal duty asserted by the plaintiffs—namely, a duty on the part of an employer to act fairly in dealings with employees—entails a policy decision and value judgment. Such a determination should only be made after the hearing of evidence at trial and not on exception, which is based solely on the allegations in the particulars of claim. The exception procedure requires the facts pleaded to be accepted as true, and the defendant failed to show that the claim is bad in law. Therefore, the exception was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Exception dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The exception is dismissed with costs.