South Africa Case Law

Mandonsela and Others v South African Local Government Bargaining Council and Others (JR1754/18)

Mandonsela and Others v South African Local Government Bargaining Council and Others (JR1754/18) [2020] ZALCJHB 45 (13 February 2020)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR1754/18

Judge

A Patel

The court found that the arbitrator's award of three months' compensation was not just and equitable given the applicants' length of service and the circumstances of their dismissal. The court held that compensation equal to twelve months' remuneration was appropriate. Reinstatement was not reasonably practicable as the third respondent never intended to employ the applicants permanently and the work was of limited duration. Regarding the TES dispute, the court determined that the fourth respondent was not a temporary employment service provider and no tripartite relationship existed between…

Source excerpt

• Unfair Dismissal
• Fixed Term Contracts
• Compensation Awards
• Temporary Employment Service
• Section 198a Lra
• Section 193 Lra

CVO School Vivo v Pretorius and Others; CVO School Vivo v Pretorius and Others (JR1006/15; JR1004/15)

CVO School Vivo v Pretorius and Others; CVO School Vivo v Pretorius and Others (JR1006/15; JR1004/15) [2017] ZALCJHB 412 (6 April 2017)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR1006/15; JR1004/15

Judge

S Snyman

The Labour Court dismissed review challenges to two CCMA awards, holding both dismissals procedurally unfair and upholding compensation, save for reducing Antoinette Pretorius’s compensation.

• Unfair Dismissal
• Procedural Fairness
• Compensation Awards
• Retrenchment
• Review Of Arbitration Award
• Disciplinary Hearing

Zapop (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (CA21/2014)

Zapop (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (CA21/2014) [2016] ZALAC 16; (2016) 37 ILJ 1882 (LAC); [2016] 9 BLLR 910 (LAC) (12 May 2016)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

CA21/2014

Judges

Sutherland JA, Davis CJ, Musi JJA

The Labour Appeal Court held that the arbitrator's finding of unfair dismissal was reasonable and met the Sidumo test. The disclosure of confidential information and disparaging remarks, while constituting misconduct, did not warrant dismissal given the absence of actual harm, the trivial nature of the remarks, and the passage of time. The arbitrator had jurisdiction to adjudicate commission claims under section 74(2) of the BCEA, as commission forms part of remuneration. No forfeiture clause or consistent practice barred Cunningham's entitlement to commission earned prior to dismissal but pa…

Source excerpt

• Unfair Dismissal
• Remuneration Claims
• Commission Payments
• Jurisdiction Of Ccma
• Interpretation Of Bcea
• Compensation Awards