Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Eskom Holdingd Soc Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation Arbitrator and Others (JR170/24) [2025] ZALCJHB 313 (8 July 2025)
The Labour Court granted condonation for a late leave-to-appeal application, but refused leave because Eskom showed no reasonable prospects of success.
Moloi v Barloworld Equipment Southern Africa (Pty) Ltd (Division of Barloworld Limited) (Application for Leave to Appeal) (JS690/2020) [2025] ZALCJHB 171 (6 May 2025)
Leave to appeal was refused in a labour matter about alleged unfair dismissal, settlement, and compensation after retrenchment.
Malas (Pty) Ltd v Stapelburg N.O. (JR559/23) [2025] ZALCJHB 145 (1 April 2025)
The Court found that the commissioner’s consideration of inconsistency was an immaterial irregularity that did not affect the outcome of the award. The commissioner’s reasoning for increasing compensation above the amount sought by Mr Hoosen was unreasonable, as it failed to consider why the legally represented employee requested only three months’ salary, did not inquire into alternative employment or the employer’s ability to pay, and ignored relevant evidence and comparable awards. The compensation awarded was not adequately justified. Accordingly, the award was reviewed and set aside in p…
Source excerpt
Janynarayan and Others v Fugro Survey Africa (Pty) Ltd (CA 04/2024) [2025] ZALCCT 18 (6 March 2025)
The Labour Appeal Court dismissed an appeal against a compensation award for unfair retrenchment, finding no basis to interfere with the trial court’s discretion.
Legend Logistics v SATAWU obo T.M and Others (JR831/24) [2025] ZALCJHB 85 (27 February 2025)
The court found that the employee's conduct was not work-related and occurred outside the workplace. The employer had no jurisdiction to discipline her for conduct that did not affect the workplace directly. The employee was not dishonest, as she genuinely believed her colleague was the father of her child and had no objection to a paternity test. The mere fact that her suspicion was incorrect did not amount to misconduct. The Commissioner’s decision that the dismissal was substantively unfair was reasonable and should not be disturbed.
Source excerpt
Springs Car Wholesalers t/a No Finance Cars (Pty) Ltd v Rangolo and Others (JR1238/23) [2025] ZALCJHB 41 (27 January 2025)
Labour Court review partly succeeded: the dismissal finding stood, but the compensation award was reduced from 12 to 5 months.
City of Cape Town v Asia Coetzee and Others (C24/2022) [2024] ZALCCT 61 (6 December 2024)
Labour Court dismissed a review of a promotion-related unfair labour practice award, upholding compensation to an employee excluded from the shortlist.
Oudtshoorn Local Municipality v TW Tytya (C290/2021) [2024] ZALCCT 23 (6 June 2024)
The Labour Court set aside a six-month backpay limit on retrospective reinstatement, holding the arbitrator conflated reinstatement with compensation.
CMC Global Outsourcing (Pty) Ltd and Another v Van Niekerk and Others (JR408/22) [2024] ZALCJHB 198 (8 May 2024)
The Labour Court held that after three months of placement, section 198A(3)(b) of the LRA deems the client (RTT) to be the sole employer, and no dual employment relationship exists with the TES (CMC). However, there was no evidence that RTT dismissed the first respondent; the removal from RTT was initiated by CMC, which acted under the mistaken belief that it remained the employer. The first respondent voluntarily entered into a new employment contract with CMC, and his subsequent dismissal by CMC for operational requirements was both substantively and procedurally unfair. The compensation aw…
Source excerpt
Department of Higher Education and Training v Commissioner Bheki Smiza General Public Service Sectoral and Others (JA53/2022) [2024] ZALAC 5; [2024] 5 BLLR 447 (LAC); (2024) 45 ILJ 1981 (LAC) (22 February 2024)
The Labour Appeal Court held that no unfair labour practice was shown in a promotion shortlist dispute, finding the employee lacked the required experience criterion.
Explore more
