South Africa Case Law

Imbani Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Homsek (Pty) Ltd and Others (5544/2018)

Imbani Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Homsek (Pty) Ltd and Others (5544/2018) [2025] ZAFSHC 205 (4 July 2025)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

5544/2018

Judge

Van Rhyn

The court found that the applicant's proposed amendment sought to introduce two distinct and mutually exclusive causes of action—one based on unjustified enrichment and the other on a repayment agreement—without pleading them in the alternative. South African law requires that such inconsistent claims be pleaded in the alternative to avoid excipiability. The amendment, as formulated, would render the particulars of claim excipiable and cause prejudice to the respondents. The court exercised its discretion to refuse the amendment, holding that the claims cannot co-exist as a single cause of ac…

Source excerpt

• Pleadings Amendment
• Unjustified Enrichment
• Condictio Indebiti
• Contractual Claims
• Alternativity Of Remedies

G4S Cash Solutions v Matlala (Rescission Application) (JS165/2016)

G4S Cash Solutions v Matlala (Rescission Application) (JS165/2016) [2025] ZALCJHB 104 (11 March 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JS165/2016

Judge

Norton

The Labour Court rescinded a leave-to-appeal judgment because the employer’s opposing submissions had not been before court, and dismissed leave to appeal.

• Rescission Of Judgment
• Leave To Appeal
• Unfair Dismissal
• Reinstatement
• Contractual Claims
• Contempt Proceedings

Member of the Executive Council: Department of Human Settlements, Free State v SXB Civil & Property Developers CC (2622/2023)

Member of the Executive Council: Department of Human Settlements, Free State v SXB Civil & Property Developers CC (2622/2023) [2025] ZAFSHC 36 (28 January 2025)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

2622/2023

Judge

Opperman

The High Court dismissed the MEC’s leave-to-appeal application, finding repeated procedural non-compliance and no reasonable prospect of success.

• Leave To Appeal
• Rescission Of Judgment
• Default Judgment
• Attorney Misconduct
• Contractual Claims
• Punitive Costs

Aon South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Smith and Others (J298/24)

Aon South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Smith and Others (J298/24) [2024] ZALCJHB 200 (8 May 2024)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J298/24

Judge

M Makhura

The Labour Court dismissed Aon’s urgent bid to enforce a restraint of trade, holding that Smith’s unpaid bonus gave rise to exceptio non adimpleti contractus.

• Restraint Of Trade
• Exceptio Non Adimpleti Contractus
• Reciprocal Obligations
• Bonus Entitlement
• Contractual Claims
• Restraint-of-trade

SAMA obo Galo v Department of Health, EC and Others (P109/2023)

SAMA obo Galo v Department of Health, EC and Others (P109/2023) [2024] ZALCPE 18 (23 February 2024)

Court

Labour Court Port Elizabeth

Case number

P109/2023

Judge

Makhura, M

The Labour Court dismissed a contempt application about Dr Galo’s reinstatement, holding that disputes over benefits and job grade had to be pursued separately.

• Contempt Of Court
• Reinstatement
• Unfair Labour Practice
• Contractual Claims
• Costs Award
• Contempt-of-court

Nonhlanhla v Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality (2014/11875)

Nonhlanhla v Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality (2014/11875) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1315 (8 November 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2014/11875

Judge

Sutherland

The plaintiff's cause of action was based on an alleged breach of the collective agreement, specifically clause 7.7, which prohibits alteration of disciplinary findings. However, the collective agreement was concluded between the union and the employer, and the plaintiff was not a party to it. Crucially, the agreement was not incorporated into her individual contract of employment, which consisted solely of a letter of appointment lacking any reference to the collective agreement. Therefore, the plaintiff could not invoke rights under the collective agreement in the High Court. The proper for…

Source excerpt

• Jurisdiction Of High Court
• Collective Agreement
• Unfair Dismissal
• Contractual Claims
• Costs In Labour Litigation

Pule v North West Parks and Tourism Board and Others (JS881/2009)

Pule v North West Parks and Tourism Board and Others (JS881/2009) [2023] ZALCJHB 346 (16 October 2023)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JS881/2009

Judge

Allen-Yaman

The Labour Court refused Gladys Pule leave to appeal and ordered her to pay costs, finding no reasonable prospects of success and no compelling reason to appeal.

• Leave To Appeal
• Costs Order
• Vexatious Litigation
• Reinstatement
• Contractual Claims
• Leave-to-appeal

Murray & Roberts Limited v Energy Fabrication (Pty) Ltd and Others (12729/2021)

Murray & Roberts Limited v Energy Fabrication (Pty) Ltd and Others (12729/2021) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1141 (9 October 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

12729/2021

Judge

ML Senyatsi

High Court ordered separation of issues in a business rescue dispute, including section 133 moratorium and arbitration jurisdiction points, and stayed the proceedings.

• Business Rescue
• Contractual Claims
• Jurisdiction
• Arbitration Clause
• Rule 33 Separation
• Director Liability

Adapt (Pty) Ltd v Maseko and Others (JR701/2019)

Adapt (Pty) Ltd v Maseko and Others (JR701/2019) [2023] ZALCJHB 5 (13 January 2023)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR701/2019

Judge

Swartz

The court found that while the applicant's failure to conduct a performance appraisal for the first respondent and to formally communicate her ineligibility for a salary increase and bonus was unfair, the compensation awarded by the commissioner was excessive given the subsequent dismissal for poor performance. The CCMA had jurisdiction to determine the unfair labour practice claim but exceeded its jurisdiction in awarding contractual claims for salary increase and bonus, as the first respondent's earnings were above the statutory threshold. The award was reviewed and set aside, and the appli…

Source excerpt

• Unfair Labour Practice
• Discretionary Bonus
• Performance Appraisal
• Ccma Jurisdiction
• Condonation
• Contractual Claims

Bester v State Information Technology Agency (SOC) Limited (JS 487/20)

Bester v State Information Technology Agency (SOC) Limited (JS 487/20) [2022] ZALCJHB 269; [2023] 4 BLLR 303 (LC) (15 September 2022)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JS 487/20

Judge

GN Moshoana

The court found that SITA had successfully raised the statutory defence under section 187(2)(b) of the LRA by proving that age 60 was the normal retirement age for employees in the government industry and at SITA. The applicant, having reached age 60, was dismissed on fair grounds and not automatically unfairly. The court held that the defences of normal and agreed retirement age are mutually exclusive and only available to the employer. The applicant's reliance on a contractual retirement age of 65 was not relevant to the statutory unfair dismissal claim, but may form the basis of a separate…

Source excerpt

• Retirement Age
• Automatically Unfair Dismissal
• Normal Retirement Age
• Contractual Claims
• Jurisdiction Of Labour Court