South Africa Case Law

BMW (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd v National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa and Another (JA 86/18)

BMW (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd v National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa and Another (JA 86/18) [2020] ZALAC 22; (2020) 41 (ILJ) 1877 (LAC) ; [2020] 11 BLLR 1079 (LAC) (18 May 2020)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

JA 86/18

Judges

Coppin, Murphy, Kathree-Setiloane

The Labour Appeal Court held that BMW’s forced retirement of an employee at 60, without a valid election or consent, was automatically unfair and age discriminatory.

• Automatically Unfair Dismissal
• Unfair Discrimination
• Retirement Age
• Compensation And Damages
• Burden Of Proof
• Employment Equity Act

Smith v Kit kat Group (Pty) Ltd (JS787/14)

Smith v Kit kat Group (Pty) Ltd (JS787/14) [2016] ZALCJHB 362; [2016] 12 BLLR 1239 (LC); (2017) 38 ILJ 483 (LC) (23 September 2016)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JS787/14

Judge

S Snyman

The court found that the applicant suffered a permanent physical disability as defined by the Employment Equity Act, resulting from his attempted suicide. The respondent's refusal to allow the applicant to return to work, based on cosmetic appearance and speech impediment, constituted direct discrimination on the basis of disability. The respondent failed to conduct any proper incapacity investigation or to reasonably accommodate the applicant, as required by law. The respondent's conduct amounted to a repudiation and effective termination of the employment contract, without due process. The…

Source excerpt

• Employment Equity Act
• Unfair Discrimination
• Disability Accommodation
• Dismissal
• Compensation And Damages

South African Airways (Pty) Ltd v Jansen Van Vuuren and Another (CA9/13, C420/2006)

South African Airways (Pty) Ltd v Jansen Van Vuuren and Another (CA9/13, C420/2006) [2014] ZALAC 108 (12 June 2014)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

CA9/13, C420/2006

Judges

Tlaletsi, Davis, Coppin

The Labour Appeal Court held that the employer's retirement policy and collective agreement discriminated against the respondent on the basis of age, as pilots over 60 were subjected to reduced salary and rank despite being fit to perform their duties. The collective agreement's discriminatory provisions could not be justified by collective bargaining or the alleged inherent requirements of the job, as no evidence was presented that age, rather than fitness, was essential. The respondent remained employed and was entitled to fair treatment and remuneration. The utilisation of accumulated leav…

Source excerpt

• Employment Equity Act
• Unfair Discrimination
• Retirement Age Policy
• Collective Agreements
• Compensation And Damages
• Unfair Labour Practice

South African Airways (Pty) Ltd v V and Another (CA9/13, C420/2006)

South African Airways (Pty) Ltd v V and Another (CA9/13, C420/2006) [2014] ZALAC 27; [2014] 8 BLLR 748 (LAC); (2014) 35 ILJ 2774 (LAC) (12 June 2014)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

CA9/13, C420/2006

Judges

Tlaletsi, Davis, Coppin

The Labour Appeal Court held that the collective agreement and employer conduct discriminated unfairly against the respondent on the basis of age. The reduction in salary and rank for pilots over 60 was not justified by any inherent requirement of the job, as fitness to fly, not age, was determinative. The employer failed to discharge its onus to prove fairness or legitimate purpose for the discrimination. The respondent remained employed and was entitled to remuneration during standby; the use of accumulated leave pay without consent constituted an unfair labour practice. The distinction bet…

Source excerpt

• Employment Equity Act
• Unfair Discrimination
• Retirement Age Policy
• Collective Agreements
• Unfair Labour Practice
• Compensation And Damages