NUM obo Milisa and Others v WBHO Construction (Pty) Ltd (PS16/13) [2016] ZALCPE 29; [2016] 6 BLLR 642 (LC) (15 March 2016)

NUM obo Milisa and Others v WBHO Construction (Pty) Ltd (PS16/13) [2016] ZALCPE 29; [2016] 6 BLLR 642 (LC) (15 March 2016)

The court found that the automatic termination clause in the applicants' contracts was invalid as it contravened the Labour Relations Act by permitting the employer to terminate employment at will. The respondent's termination of the applicants' contracts without notice constituted dismissal for operational...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] ZALCPE 29
Parties
Applicant: NUM obo Thobela Milisa and 53 Others; Respondent: WBHO Construction (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 March 2016
Case Number
PS16/13
Procedural Posture
Labour Unfair Dismissal / Trial
Outcome
The applicants' dismissal for operational requirements was substantively and procedurally unfair. Compensation and costs awarded to the applicants.
Judges
Lallie
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Fixed Term Contracts, Automatic Termination Clauses, Operational Requirements, Compensation for Unfair Dismissal, Procedural Fairness
Labour Law Unfair Dismissal Fixed Term Contracts Automatic Termination Clauses Operational Requirements Compensation for Unfair Dismissal Procedural Fairness

Source-derived case record

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

NUM obo Thobela Milisa and 53 Others

Applicant

WBHO Construction (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Labour Unfair Dismissal / Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants' contracts were linked to the duration of the project.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent was entitled to terminate the contracts before project completion.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants' dismissals were lawful and fair.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the automatic termination clause in the applicants' contracts was invalid as it contravened the Labour Relations Act by permitting the employer to terminate employment at will. The respondent's termination of the applicants' contracts without notice constituted dismissal for operational requirements. The respondent failed to comply with the mandatory substantive and procedural requirements of section 189 of the Labour Relations Act, rendering the dismissals both substantively and procedurally unfair. The applicants were entitled to compensation, but the court determined that maximum compensation was not just and equitable given the circumstances, including the...

Court Disposition

The applicants' dismissal for operational requirements was substantively and procedurally unfair. Compensation and costs awarded to the applicants.

Orders

  • The termination of the contracts of employment of the individual applicants constituted dismissal for the respondent's operational requirements.
  • The dismissal of the individual applicants for the respondent's operational requirements was substantively and procedurally unfair.