South Africa Case Law

City Tshwana Metropolitan Municipality v Kleinot N.O. and Others (Leave to Appeal) (JR1946/23; JR1946/23)

City Tshwana Metropolitan Municipality v Kleinot N.O. and Others (Leave to Appeal) (JR1946/23; JR1946/23) [2025] ZALCJHB 314 (15 July 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR1946/23

Judge

S Snyman

The court found that neither SAMWU nor IMATU advanced proper legal grounds or demonstrated reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The authorities relied upon by the court regarding exemption principles apply equally to the public and private sectors, as the LRA does not distinguish between them. The financial expert's role was not substantiated, and the panellist's findings were based on a misdirection regarding affordability. The respondents failed to provide contradictory financial information, and their arguments regarding collective bargaining and the application of the affordability…

Source excerpt

• Collective Bargaining
• Exemption From Wage Agreement
• Leave To Appeal
• Review Of Administrative Decision
• Affordability Test

Golden Arrow Bus Services (Pty) Ltd and Another v South African Road Passenger Bargaining Council and Others (C315/21)

Golden Arrow Bus Services (Pty) Ltd and Another v South African Road Passenger Bargaining Council and Others (C315/21) [2025] ZALCCT 23 (9 April 2025)

Court

Labour Court Cape Town

Case number

C315/21

Judge

S Snyman

The Labour Court held that the exemption appeal decisions refusing GABS exemption from wage provisions under the 2018, 2020, and 2021 collective agreements were reviewable and unsustainable, as they were based on material errors of law, misconstrued the nature of unfair competition, and failed to consider relevant facts and special circumstances. The Court found that wage disparity resulting from historical compliance with collective agreements, in the context of new competitors entering the market at minimum wage, constituted unfair competition and threatened the future viability of GABS. Ex…

Source excerpt

• Collective Bargaining
• Exemption Procedure
• Unfair Competition
• Wage Disparity
• Review Under Lra
• Remedy Substitution

Innovative Staffing Solutions (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Employment and Labour and Others (JR2749/22)

Innovative Staffing Solutions (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Employment and Labour and Others (JR2749/22) [2025] ZALCJHB 141 (3 April 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR2749/22

Judge

Daniels

The court found that the registrar and deputy registrar followed a rational and fair process in determining the representativeness of the parties to the Bargaining Council, as required by the Labour Relations Act. The certificate issued was a valid determination under section 49, and the deputy registrar was lawfully empowered to act under section 108(2) of the LRA. The applicant's arguments regarding the wrong statutory section, discrepancies in figures, lack of independent data sources, and absence of a representation process for non-parties were rejected as lacking substance or statutory b…

Source excerpt

• Collective Bargaining
• Extension Of Collective Agreements
• Representativeness Determination
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Majoritarianism
• Delegation Of Statutory Functions

NEHAWU v Minister of Public Service and Administration and Others (J419/23)

NEHAWU v Minister of Public Service and Administration and Others (J419/23) [2025] ZALCJHB 59 (20 February 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J419/23

Judge

N Tshisevhe

The Labour Court dismissed NEHAWU’s contempt application, finding the respondents had complied by positively engaging on the wage demands and acting in good faith.

• Contempt Of Court
• Settlement Agreement
• Collective Bargaining
• Majoritarianism
• Costs Order
• Contempt-of-court

SA Container Depots (Pty) Ltd t/a Bidvest SACD v Sheriff: Durban Coastal and Others (D16/2025)

SA Container Depots (Pty) Ltd t/a Bidvest SACD v Sheriff: Durban Coastal and Others (D16/2025) [2025] ZALCD 3; (2025) 46 ILJ 1263 (LC) (28 January 2025)

Court

Labour Court Durban

Case number

D16/2025

Judge

Allen-Yaman

The court found that the strike action undertaken by the third to further respondents was procedurally and substantively compliant with the Labour Relations Act and did not offend any of its limitations. The acts of violence, while serious and temporally linked to the strike, did not constitute a basis in law for declaring the strike unprotected, as the LRA does not provide for such a limitation. Furthermore, the applicant failed to establish a causal connection between the violent acts and any of the respondents or their members. The court held that, absent such a link, interdictory relief c…

Source excerpt

• Protected Strike
• Strike Related Violence
• Picketing Rules
• Interdictory Relief
• Collective Bargaining
• Urgency In Labour Disputes

UIS Analytical Services (Pty) Ltd v Independent Democratic Union of South Africa and Others (2024/133083)

UIS Analytical Services (Pty) Ltd v Independent Democratic Union of South Africa and Others (2024/133083) [2024] ZALCJHB 450; [2025] 2 BLLR 207 (LC); (2025) 46 ILJ 642 (LC) (20 November 2024)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

2024/133083

Judge

S Snyman

The Labour Court dismissed an urgent interdict against a planned strike over 13th-cheque demands, holding the dispute was unregulated and the strike protected.

• Strike Interdict
• Collective Bargaining
• Interpretation Of Collective Agreements
• Unfair Labour Practice
• Benefits Dispute
• Prima Facie Right

SACCAWU v Lawson (J1529/22)

SACCAWU v Lawson (J1529/22) [2024] ZALCJHB 448 (12 November 2024)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J1529/22

Judge

A Snider SC

The Labour Court found that the differentiation in Sunday pay rates among various categories of employees at Pick & Pay was the result of collective bargaining, legislative provisions, and operational requirements, not unfair discrimination under the Employment Equity Act. The evidence did not establish that the differentiation was based on gender, family responsibility, or any arbitrary ground analogous to the listed grounds in section 6(1) of the EEA. Statistical analysis showed no disproportionate impact on women or those with family responsibilities. The Commissioner correctly found that…

Source excerpt

• Employment Equity Act
• Unfair Discrimination
• Pay Differentials
• Collective Bargaining
• Prescription
• Work Of Equal Value

National Union of Metalworkers v Commission For Conciliation (PR06/22)

National Union of Metalworkers v Commission For Conciliation (PR06/22) [2024] ZALCPE 23; [2024] 9 BLLR 991 (LC); (2024) 45 ILJ 2608 (LC) (10 June 2024)

Court

Labour Court Port Elizabeth

Case number

PR06/22

Judge

MZN Lallie

The court found that the commissioner interpreted the certificate of registration correctly by giving the words their ordinary meaning and considering both the literal and purposive context. The phrase 'one or more' in the certificate is disjunctive, allowing for either transportation or storage of goods alone to fall within the registered scope of the fifth respondent. The commissioner conducted the correct enquiry, considered the relevant facts and law, and reached a reasonable decision. The applicant failed to demonstrate any gross irregularity, misconduct, or unreasonable outcome. The del…

Source excerpt

• Demarcation Dispute
• Collective Bargaining
• Scope Of Registration
• Condonation
• Review Of Arbitration Award

South African Transport & Allied Workers Union v Servest Security (Pty) Ltd and Another (J806/21)

South African Transport & Allied Workers Union v Servest Security (Pty) Ltd and Another (J806/21) [2024] ZALCJHB 120; (2024) 45 ILJ 1308 (LC) (14 March 2024)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J806/21

Judge

Botes

The court found that the closed shop agreement between KAWU and Servest Security was invalid as it imposed union membership as a precondition for the conclusion of an employment contract, constituting a prohibited pre-entry closed shop under section 26(3)(c) of the Labour Relations Act. The agreement failed to meet statutory requirements for validity and did not lawfully permit the deduction of agency fees from non-members. Servest Security was not entitled to deduct union fees from employees who had resigned from KAWU, and double deductions from SATAWU members were unlawful unless independen…

Source excerpt

• Closed Shop Agreement
• Pre Entry Closed Shop
• Agency Fee Deductions
• Trade Union Majoritarianism
• Collective Bargaining
• Employment Contract Conditions

Bliss Brands (Pty) Ltd v NASA - Workers (JR391/22)

Bliss Brands (Pty) Ltd v NASA - Workers (JR391/22) [2024] ZALCJHB 95; [2024] 5 BLLR 484 (LC); (2024) 45 ILJ 1250 (LC) (4 March 2024)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR391/22

Judge

R Daniels

The Labour Court held that neither the Labour Relations Act nor the CCMA Rules prohibit the withdrawal of disputes by a referring party. The withdrawal of a dispute is not a functionary act and is akin to absolution from the instance, which does not bar reinstitution of proceedings. The applicant's arguments regarding the need for employer consent, the doctrine of election, and the undermining of collective bargaining were rejected. The LRA does not require a union to be bound by its election to arbitrate and does not prevent future pursuit of organisational rights. The commissioner committed…

Source excerpt

• Organisational Rights
• Withdrawal Of Dispute
• Collective Bargaining
• Doctrine Of Election
• Arbitration Procedure