South Africa Case Law

Sethibelo v General Public Service Sector Bargaining Council and Others (JR 237/21)

Sethibelo v General Public Service Sector Bargaining Council and Others (JR 237/21) [2025] ZALCJHB 250 (26 June 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR 237/21

Judge

Tlhotlhalemaje

The court found that the applicant's dismissal was procedurally unfair due to significant defects in the disciplinary process. The employer failed to formally revoke the applicant's approved leave, and the chairperson of the disciplinary hearing proceeded on the incorrect assumption that no leave had been granted. The evidence showed that the applicant was on authorised leave and that there was an agreement to postpone the hearing, which was not disputed. The Arbitrator failed to consider these facts and thus erred in finding the dismissal procedurally fair. However, the court upheld the Arbi…

Source excerpt

• Procedural Fairness
• Protected Disclosure Act
• Disciplinary Hearing
• Compensation For Unfair Dismissal
• Contractual Rights
• Audi Alteram Partem

Moqhaka Local Municipality and Another v Tshabalala (JA7/25)

Moqhaka Local Municipality and Another v Tshabalala (JA7/25) [2025] ZALAC 36 (11 June 2025)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

JA 07/25

Judges

Molahlehi, Tokota, Basson

The Labour Appeal Court dismissed a section 18 appeal and upheld execution of a reinstatement order pending a Constitutional Court appeal.

• Precautionary Suspension
• Disciplinary Hearing
• Exceptional Circumstances
• Irreparable Harm
• Section 18 Superior Courts Act
• Section-18-superior-courts-act

Letakgomo v Johnson Matthey (Pty) Ltd (J683/23)

Letakgomo v Johnson Matthey (Pty) Ltd (J683/23) [2025] ZALCJHB 240 (31 May 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J683/23

Judge

G N Moshoana

The court found that the applicant did not make a disclosure within the meaning of the Protected Disclosures Act, as his report concerned criminal conduct not attributable to the employer or its employees. Without a protected disclosure, the disciplinary hearing could not be considered an occupational detriment, and the jurisdictional requirements for invoking section 188A(11) of the Labour Relations Act were not met. The court further held that the holding of a disciplinary hearing is not, in itself, an occupational detriment, and that Rule 34(9) of the CCMA Rules, which compels the employer…

Source excerpt

• Protected Disclosure Act
• Occupational Detriment
• Disciplinary Hearing
• Section 188a Inquiry
• Costs Award

Sibanyoni v Speaker of City of Mbombela (2025/0209203)

Sibanyoni v Speaker of City of Mbombela (2025/0209203) [2025] ZALCJHB 195 (22 May 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

2025/0209203

Judge

Daniels

Urgent final relief over a precautionary suspension failed after the Labour Court found the application was launched too late and lacked urgency.

• Precautionary Suspension
• Disciplinary Hearing
• Urgency Requirements
• Unlawful Suspension
• Urgency
• Urgent-applications

Auto Pedigree, Division of Motus Group v Dispute Resolution Centre (MIBCO) and Others (JR2081/22)

Auto Pedigree, Division of Motus Group v Dispute Resolution Centre (MIBCO) and Others (JR2081/22) [2025] ZALCJHB 57 (4 February 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR2081/22

Judge

Daniels

The Labour Court dismissed a review of an arbitration award after finding the commissioner’s procedural unfairness ruling was not unreasonable.

• Review Of Arbitration Award
• Procedural Fairness
• Condonation
• Disciplinary Hearing
• Reasonableness Test
• Labour-law

NTM obo Chokoe and Others v PPO Workforce Staffing (Workforce Group (Pty) Ltd) (J302/18)

NTM obo Chokoe and Others v PPO Workforce Staffing (Workforce Group (Pty) Ltd) (J302/18) [2024] ZALCJHB 500 (11 December 2024)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J302/18

Judge

Tlhotlhalemaje

The Labour Court held that the applicants’ dismissals were procedurally and substantively fair after finding they engaged in an unprotected strike and ignored ultimatums.

• Unprotected Strike
• Procedural Fairness
• Substantive Fairness
• Organisational Rights
• Disciplinary Hearing
• Remedies For Unfair Dismissal

Hoffman v Freedom Front Plus and Another (120034/2024)

Hoffman v Freedom Front Plus and Another (120034/2024) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1061 (31 October 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

120034/2024

Judge

E van der Schyff

The High Court struck an urgent interdict application off the roll with costs, finding the challenge to a scheduled disciplinary hearing was premature and urgency was not established.

• Interdict
• Disciplinary Hearing
• Urgency
• Costs Order
• Urgent-interdict
• Disciplinary-hearings

Ntombela v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development and Others (J847/2024)

Ntombela v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development and Others (J847/2024) [2024] ZALCJHB 337 (25 August 2024)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J847/2024

Judge

Tlhotlhalemaje

The court found that the applicant's urgency was self-created, as she delayed bringing the application after being notified of her deemed discharge. The relief sought was impermissible, as the applicant attempted to bypass established dispute resolution mechanisms under the Labour Relations Act by seeking declaratory and interdictory orders in circumstances where her termination was by operation of law under section 17(3)(a)(i) of the Public Service Act. The court held that the applicant could obtain substantial redress through appropriate channels and that financial distress alone did not ju…

Source excerpt

• Deemed Discharge
• Urgent Interim Relief
• Unfair Dismissal
• Mandamus
• Disciplinary Hearing
• Salary Withholding

Mako v SA Local Government Bargaining Council and Others (JR327/21)

Mako v SA Local Government Bargaining Council and Others (JR327/21) [2024] ZALCJHB 270 (15 July 2024)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR156/22

Judge

RN Daniels

The court found that the applicant's grounds for review were without merit. The arbitrator's evaluation of the evidence was reasonable, and the applicant's version was inconsistent and improbable. The refusal to allow a further witness, while incorrect in principle, did not materially affect the fairness of the proceedings or the outcome, as the evidence was not put to the employer's witnesses and was irrelevant to the central issue. The absence of a pre-suspension hearing did not render the dismissal procedurally unfair, as suspension was precautionary. The applicant failed to demonstrate th…

Source excerpt

• Review Of Arbitration Award
• Procedural Fairness
• Disciplinary Hearing
• Suspension
• Institutional Bias

Buckham and Others v Plattner Golf (Pty) Ltd and Others (21472/22)

Buckham and Others v Plattner Golf (Pty) Ltd and Others (21472/22) [2024] ZAWCHC 64 (1 March 2024)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

21472/22

Judge

Wille

The court found that the first respondent's termination and suspension of the applicants' memberships in the Links Golf Club were procedurally and substantively unlawful. The club's rules required a fair hearing before any adverse action, which was not afforded to the applicants. The controlling mind behind the first respondent acted with bias and pre-judgment, and the board failed to exercise independent judgment. The purported grounds for termination, such as 'spurned friendship,' were vague and not contemplated by the rules. The subsequent suspension was a device to perpetuate the initial…

Source excerpt

• Membership Termination
• Natural Justice
• Procedural Fairness
• Bias In Private Entities
• Disciplinary Hearing
• Remedies For Unlawful Suspension