Esheria South Africa Case Law
Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
4 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Labour Law [2024] ZALCD 15

Fraser-MacDonald v Curro Holdings t/a Curro Mount Richmore (D295/20)

Fraser-MacDonald v Curro Holdings t/a Curro Mount Richmore (D295/20) [2024] ZALCD 15 (14 June 2024)

Court
Labour Court Durban
Case number
D295/20
Judge
M Makhura

The applicant failed to provide a full and reasonable explanation for the delay in referring her claim, particularly for the period after the national lockdown when the Labour Court was operational. Her prospects of success in the main claim were poor, as she conceded the existence of a retirement age and failed to establish that her dismissal was automatically unfair or based on age discrimination. The inconsistency argument regarding other employees was insufficient, as those employees were engaged on new fixed-term contracts after retirement, not as extensions of the retirement age. The ap…

Source excerpt

  • Automatically Unfair Dismissal
  • Condonation
  • Retirement Age
  • Discrimination On Age
  • Prospects Of Success
  • Costs In Labour Court
Read case analysis
Labour Law [2024] ZALCJHB 6

Mara v Tems Meat Wholesalers (JS 25/2021)

Mara v Tems Meat Wholesalers (JS 25/2021) [2024] ZALCJHB 6 (19 January 2024)

Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Case number
JS 25/2021
Judge
Mahosi

The Court found that the applicant failed to prove that he was coerced or acted under duress when signing the mutual separation agreement. The evidence did not demonstrate actual violence or reasonable fear caused by considerable evil, nor did the applicant immediately raise any complaint of coercion. The applicant had the opportunity to refuse to sign but chose not to. The agreement was entered into in full and final settlement of all claims, and the applicant accepted its terms. As such, the settlement agreement is valid and binding, and the fairness of the dismissal does not arise. The app…

Source excerpt

  • Automatic Unfair Dismissal
  • Duress In Settlement Agreement
  • Early Retirement
  • Mutual Separation
  • Contractual Principles
  • Discrimination On Age
Read case analysis
Labour Law [2019] ZALCJHB 146

National Union of Metal Workers of SA and Another v BMW (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd (JS740/18)

National Union of Metal Workers of SA and Another v BMW (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd (JS740/18) [2019] ZALCJHB 146; (2019) 40 ILJ 1818 (LC) (19 February 2019)

Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Case number
JS740/18
Judge
Van Niekerk

The Labour Court held that section 191(11) of the LRA clearly distinguishes between referrals for arbitration and adjudication. For adjudication, the statute requires referral within 90 days of the CCMA issuing a certificate of outcome. The court found that the applicants referred the dispute within 90 days of the certificate, making the referral timeous. The respondent's reliance on SAMWU v Ngwathe Local Municipality was misplaced, as that case dealt with arbitration referrals and did not overturn the principle established in Hernic Exploration. The Constitutional Court in F & J Electrical c…

Source excerpt

  • Automatic Unfair Dismissal
  • Discrimination On Age
  • Late Referral Condonation
  • Section 191 Lra
  • Jurisdictional Time Limits
Read case analysis
Labour Law [2007] ZALC 58

Rockliffte v Mincom (Pty) Ltd (JS746/05)

Rockliffte v Mincom (Pty) Ltd (JS746/05) [2007] ZALC 58; (2008) 29 ILJ 399 (LC) (17 September 2007)

Court
Labour Court
Case number
JS746/05
Judge
G N Moshoana

The Court found that the applicant failed to prove the existence of an oral agreement to extend his retirement age to 70. The documentary evidence, including the letter of appointment and retirement fund rules, established 65 years as the agreed retirement age for male employees. The applicant's own conduct in approaching the respondent before his 65th birthday indicated his awareness of the agreed retirement age. The dismissal was based on age, but since the applicant had reached the agreed retirement age, the respondent's defence under section 187(2)(b) of the Labour Relations Act succeeded…

Source excerpt

  • Automatic Unfair Dismissal
  • Retirement Age
  • Discrimination On Age
  • Onus Of Proof
  • Waiver And Estoppel
Read case analysis
Labour Law [2004] ZALAC 8

Rubin Sportswear v SA Clothing and Textile Workers Union and Others (CA8/03)

Rubin Sportswear v SA Clothing and Textile Workers Union and Others (CA8/03) [2004] ZALAC 8; [2004] 10 BLLR 986 (LAC); (2004) 25 ILJ 1671 (LAC) (9 July 2004)

Court
Labour Appeal Court
Case number
CA8/03
Judges
Zondo JP, Willis JA, Davis AJA

The Labour Appeal Court held that Rubin Sportswear could not unilaterally impose a retirement age of 60 on employees transferred from Val, as their contracts did not previously contain any retirement age provision. The concept of 'normal retirement age' under section 187(2)(b) requires an established norm, either by agreement or by consistent practice over a sufficiently long period and among a significant number of employees in the same capacity. The appellant's unilateral action did not create such a norm. Therefore, the dismissal of the respondents on reaching age 60 was not justified unde…

Source excerpt

  • Automatic Unfair Dismissal
  • Retirement Age
  • Unilateral Change Of Terms
  • Transfer Of Business
  • Section 197
  • Discrimination On Age
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.