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
Solidarity obo Fourie v Grundling and Others (JR2768/2021) [2024] ZALCJHB 277 (18 July 2024)
Labour Court dismissed a review of a CCMA jurisdictional ruling, holding that the applicant could not obtain multiple compensation for the same promotion dispute.
Special Investigating Unit v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR509/2014) [2017] ZALCJHB 127 (21 April 2017)
The Labour Court held that lodging a complaint and investigation did not amount to disciplinary action short of dismissal, so no unfair labour practice arose.
Ncane v Lyster NO and Others (DA27/15) [2017] ZALAC 1; (2017) 38 ILJ 907 (LAC); [2017] 4 BLLR 350 (LAC) (10 January 2017)
The Labour Appeal Court dismissed an SAPS promotion appeal, holding that the appellant was not entitled to protected promotion and that compensation was appropriate.
Ncane v Lyster and Others (D05/2012) [2014] ZALCD 75 (8 December 2014)
Labour Court review of an unfair promotion award: the court found procedural and substantive unfairness in SAPS's promotion process and awarded five months' compensation.
Members of the Executive Council for Tourism and Environmental and Economic Affairs Free State v Nondumo and Others (JR430/04) [2005] ZALC 60; (2005) 26 ILJ 1337 (LC); [2005] 10 BLLR 974 (LC) (15 March 2005)
The Labour Court reviewed an unfair labour practice award, setting aside reinstatement and punitive costs while confirming compensation and unpaid salary.
Penny v 600 SA Holdings (Pty) Ltd (J565/02) [2002] ZALC 100; (2003) 24 ILJ 967 (LC); [2003] 2 BLLR 200 (LC) (29 November 2002)
Labor Court judgment on enforcing a CCMA award, tax deductions, and set-off of an alleged loan against compensation.
EC Lenning Limited t/a Besaans Du Plessis Foundries v Pieter Engelbrecht (JA69/98) [1999] ZALAC 11 (24 June 1999)
The Labour Appeal Court found the dismissal procedurally unfair for failing to explore alternative work, but reduced the compensation award.
Buffalo Signs Co Ltd and others v De Castro AJM and others (JA36/98) [1999] ZALAC 4 (3 March 1999)
The court found that the retrenchment of the respondents was both substantively and procedurally unfair. The evidence established that the business of the first appellant had been sold to the second appellant as a going concern, making the second appellant the true employer of the respondents. The retrenchment exercise was conducted by the first appellant in order to shield the second appellant from liability, amounting to a deceitful and unfair practice. The court held that only the employer, as defined by the Labour Relations Act 1956, could be held liable for compensation for unfair labour…
Source excerpt
Bank of Lisbon International v Pinheiro (JA51/97) [1998] ZALAC 16 (11 February 1998)
Labour Appeal Court found a retrenchment procedurally unfair for failure to consult on alternatives and reduced compensation to R150,000, with special costs awarded.
Explore more
