South Africa Case Law

K H Mining and Engineering Projects (Pty) Ltd v Evander Gold Mining (Pty) Ltd and Another (2024-130458)

K H Mining and Engineering Projects (Pty) Ltd v Evander Gold Mining (Pty) Ltd and Another (2024-130458) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1320 (10 December 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2024-130458

Judge

N Janse Van Nieuwenhuizen

The High Court granted an interim interdict stopping termination notices for mining services agreements, pending arbitration over the contract and purchase-order terms.

• Termination For Convenience
• Interim Interdict
• Arbitration Referral
• Contractual Interpretation
• Termination-for-convenience
• Interim-interdict

Eskom Holdings SOC LTD v City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality and Others (2024/048808)

Eskom Holdings SOC LTD v City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality and Others (2024/048808) [2024] ZAGPJHC 794 (12 August 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2024/048808

Judge

Maenetje AJ

The High Court granted Eskom leave to appeal but refused immediate execution pending appeal, finding Eskom had not proved the City would avoid irreparable harm.

• Leave To Appeal
• Set Off
• Arbitration Referral
• Urgent Application
• Execution Pending Appeal
• Leave-to-appeal

Group Five Power International (Pty) Limited v Cenpower Generation Company Limited and Others (2008/41068)

Group Five Power International (Pty) Limited v Cenpower Generation Company Limited and Others (2008/41068) [2018] ZAGPJHC 663 (16 November 2018)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2008/41068

Judge

WHG van der Linde

The High Court refused to interdict payment under retention and performance bonds in a construction dispute, finding no clear fraud or contractual bar on the call.

• On Demand Bonds
• Interim Interdict
• Fraud Exception
• Construction Contracts
• Arbitration Referral
• Balance Of Convenience

Orffer NO and Others v Orffer NO and Others (8064/2017)

Orffer NO and Others v Orffer NO and Others (8064/2017) [2017] ZAWCHC 102 (15 September 2017)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

8064/2017

Judge

Bozalek

High Court declaratory dispute over a servitude access road: the court held the clause 16 suspensive condition was met and arbitration could proceed.

• Servitudinal Right Of Way
• Settlement Agreement Interpretation
• Suspensive Condition
• Arbitration Referral
• Good Faith Obligation
• Settlement-agreement-interpretation

Mawethu Civils v NUM and Others (PA2/14)

Mawethu Civils v NUM and Others (PA2/14) [2016] ZALAC 87 (20 April 2016)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

PA2/14

Judges

Waglay, Sutherland, Murphy

The Labour Appeal Court held that a dispute over paid leave linked to a practice was an unfair labour practice, making the strike unprotected under the LRA.

• Unfair Labour Practice
• Strike Prohibition
• Arbitration Referral
• Benefits Dispute
• No Work No Pay
• Unfair-labour-practice

Mawethu Civils (Pty) Ltd and Another v National Union of Mineworkers and Others (PA24/14)

Mawethu Civils (Pty) Ltd and Another v National Union of Mineworkers and Others (PA24/14) [2016] ZALAC 13; [2016] 7 BLLR 661 (LAC); (2016) 37 ILJ 1851 (LAC) (20 April 2016)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

PA24/14

Judges

Waglay JP, Sutherland JA, Murphy AJA

The Labour Appeal Court held the strike was unprotected because the dispute was an unfair labour practice referable to arbitration under the LRA.

• Unfair Labour Practice
• Strike Prohibition
• Arbitration Referral
• Benefits Dispute
• Section 65 Lra
• Section 191 Lra

Mobile Radio Communications (Pty) Ltd v Micromatica 327 (Pty) Ltd (3548/2004)

Mobile Radio Communications (Pty) Ltd v Micromatica 327 (Pty) Ltd (3548/2004) [2015] ZAGPPHC 630 (19 August 2015)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

3548/2004

Judge

Khami Makhafola

The High Court refused to amend a consent order, holding it could not be varied unilaterally and had lapsed when performance became impossible.

• Variation Of Court Orders
• Consent Orders
• Impossibility Of Performance
• Arbitration Referral
• Liquidation Effects
• Consent-orders

MEDWUSA obo Maile v Zanthe Floral (Pty) Ltd (JS924/11)

MEDWUSA obo Maile v Zanthe Floral (Pty) Ltd (JS924/11) [2014] ZALCJHB 281 (22 July 2014)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JS924/11

Judge

Maenetje

The Labour Court held it lacked jurisdiction over an unfair labour practice dispute about demotion and dismissed the referral, with no costs order.

• Unfair Labour Practice
• Demotion
• Jurisdiction
• Condonation
• Arbitration Referral
• Unfair-labour-practice

Business Zone 1010 CC t/a Emmarentia Convenience Centre v Controller of Petroleum Products and Others (7282/2013)

Business Zone 1010 CC t/a Emmarentia Convenience Centre v Controller of Petroleum Products and Others (7282/2013) [2014] ZAGPPHC 257; [2014] 3 All SA 94 (GP) (9 May 2014)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

7282/2013

Judge

Prinsloo

The court held that the decisions of the Controller and Minister refusing to refer the applicant's dispute to arbitration under section 12B of the Petroleum Products Act were final administrative actions reviewable under PAJA. The Controller erred in law by making findings on the validity of the contract and refusing the referral based on pending litigation, matters outside his statutory powers. The threshold for referral to arbitration under section 12B is low, requiring only an allegation of unfair or unreasonable contractual practice, and does not require an undisputed contract. The court…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Petroleum Products Act
• Unfair Contractual Practices
• Arbitration Referral
• Ministerial Appeal
• Judicial Review

Parliament of the Republic of South Africa v NEHAWU obo Others (C 175/10)

Parliament of the Republic of South Africa v NEHAWU obo Others (C 175/10) [2011] ZALCCT 13; [2011] 9 BLLR 905 (LC); (2011) 32 ILJ 2534 (LC) (26 May 2011)

Court

Labour Court Cape Town

Case number

C 175/10

Judge

Steenkamp

The court found that the true nature of the dispute was an alleged unfair labour practice relating to failure to promote, not a unilateral change to terms and conditions of employment. The employees sought promotion and appropriate remuneration, not restoration of previous conditions. The CCMA lacked jurisdiction to arbitrate the dispute under section 74 of the Labour Relations Act, as the referral was not for an interest dispute but for an unfair labour practice. The arbitrator's ruling was unreasonable and was set aside, with the court substituting a ruling that the CCMA did not have jurisd…

Source excerpt

• Ccma Jurisdiction
• Unfair Labour Practice
• Demotion
• Essential Services
• Condonation
• Arbitration Referral