South Africa Case Law

September and Others v CMI Business Enterprise CC (CCT279/16)

September and Others v CMI Business Enterprise CC (CCT279/16) [2018] ZACC 4; 2018 (4) BCLR 483 (CC); (2018) 39 ILJ 987 (CC); [2018] 5 BLLR 431 (CC) (27 February 2018)

Court

Constitutional Court

Case number

CCT279/16

Judges

Zondo DCJ, Cameron J, Froneman J, Jafta J, Kathree Setiloane AJ, Kollapen AJ, Madlanga J, Mhlantla J, Theron J, Zondi AJ

The majority held that the Labour Court had jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute because, although the referral form described the dispute as unfair discrimination, the substance of the dispute—constructive dismissal due to racial discrimination—was canvassed during conciliation. The Court found that the referral documents and certificate of outcome are prima facie evidence of the nature of the dispute, but where the true nature is disputed, evidence from conciliation proceedings may be admitted to clarify the substance. Rule 16 of the CCMA Rules does not render evidence as to the nature of…

Source excerpt

• Conciliation Privilege
• Automatically Unfair Dismissal
• Constructive Dismissal
• Racial Discrimination
• Jurisdiction Of Labour Court
• Interpretation Of Ccma Rules

Rahn v Cheil South Africa (Pty) Ltd (JS752/2013)

Rahn v Cheil South Africa (Pty) Ltd (JS752/2013) [2015] ZALCJHB 180; (2015) 36 ILJ 2657 (LC) (12 June 2015)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JS752/2013

Judge

Steenkamp

Labour Court dismissed special pleas against an unfair dismissal claim, holding it could hear an alternative claim under amended s 158(2)(b) and that conciliation disclosures were protected.

• Automatically Unfair Dismissal
• Protected Disclosure
• Jurisdiction Of Labour Court
• Conciliation Privilege
• Lis Pendens
• Labour-court-jurisdiction