South Africa Case Law

Styen v Business Connexion Group Limited (J1500/20)

Styen v Business Connexion Group Limited (J1500/20) [2025] ZALCJHB 37; [2025] 5 BLLR 534 (LC) (7 February 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J1500/20

Judge

M Makhura

The Court found that the transfer of UCS to BCX under section 197 of the LRA resulted in all terms and conditions of employment, including the agreed retirement age of 60 years, being transferred to BCX. The plaintiff's refusal to sign a new contract did not alter the legal position, and no amendment to the retirement age was agreed or effected. The promise of harmonisation to a retirement age of 65 years was not contractually binding and did not constitute a variation of the plaintiff's terms. The Court held that the plaintiff reached the agreed retirement age and her dismissal was fair unde…

Source excerpt

• Automatic Unfair Dismissal
• Retirement Age
• Section 197 Transfer
• Discrimination
• Employment Contract Terms

Tiger Brands Limited v African Meat Industry & Allied Trade Union (AMITU) and Others (D1267/19)

Tiger Brands Limited v African Meat Industry & Allied Trade Union (AMITU) and Others (D1267/19) [2019] ZALCD 12 (25 October 2019)

Court

Labour Court Durban

Case number

D1267/19

Judge

S.B. Mgaga

The Labour Court confirmed an interdict against a union-led overtime ban, holding the concerted refusal to work overtime was an unprotected strike.

• Unprotected Strike
• Overtime Work
• Collective Action
• Labour Relations Act
• Interdict
• Employment Contract Terms

Ludick v Rural Maintenance (Pty) Ltd (JS 633/07)

Ludick v Rural Maintenance (Pty) Ltd (JS 633/07) [2013] ZALCJHB 291; [2014] 2 BLLR 178 (LC) (30 October 2013)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JS 633/07

Judge

Van Niekerk

The court held that the BCEA establishes a minimum standard for annual leave and its payment on termination. The Act does not permit unlimited accrual of leave, nor does it contemplate automatic forfeiture of leave not taken within six months after the end of a leave cycle. Contractual provisions that stipulate forfeiture of leave before the expiry of the statutory six-month period are less favourable than the BCEA and must be read down. The plaintiff is entitled to payment for annual leave accrued during the leave cycle ending 5 January 2006 but not taken, together with interest. Claims for…

Source excerpt

• Annual Leave Entitlement
• Basic Conditions Of Employment Act
• Forfeiture Of Leave
• Employment Contract Terms
• Termination Payments

Nyathi v Special Investigating Unit (J1334/11)

Nyathi v Special Investigating Unit (J1334/11) [2011] ZALCJHB 66; [2011] 12 BLLR 1211 (LC); (2011) 32 ILJ 2991 (LC) (22 July 2011)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J1334/11

Judge

A C Basson

The court found that the Disciplinary Policy, specifically clause 9.2, was contractually binding and peremptory, providing that suspension lapses after 90 days unless disciplinary proceedings are instituted. The respondent, having elected to suspend the applicant under the Disciplinary Policy, could not subsequently rely on a separate contractual provision to extend the suspension indefinitely. The extension of the applicant's suspension beyond 90 days was therefore unlawful and invalid. Regarding termination, the court held that the applicant's refusal to undergo a polygraph examination cons…

Source excerpt

• Unlawful Suspension
• Disciplinary Policy
• Repudiation Of Contract
• Urgent Interdict
• Employment Contract Terms

Solidarity obo Wehncke v Surf4Cars (Pty) Ltd (JS 892/08)

Solidarity obo Wehncke v Surf4Cars (Pty) Ltd (JS 892/08) [2011] ZALCJHB 58; [2011] 10 BLLR 1007 (LC); (2011) 32 ILJ 3037 (LC) (13 July 2011)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JS 892/08

Judge

R Lagrange

The court found that the applicant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that his dismissal was effected to compel him to accept a new term of employment. The evidence indicated that the employer was enforcing an existing company policy regarding company vehicle usage, not introducing a new term. Furthermore, the dismissal was final and not conditional upon the applicant's acceptance of the disputed term. Following the reasoning in Fry’s Metals, only conditional dismissals intended to induce acceptance of a demand fall within section 187(1)(c). As the applicant's dismissal was not con…

Source excerpt

• Automatically Unfair Dismissal
• Section 187 Lra
• Mutual Interest Demand
• Employment Contract Terms

SA Metal & Machinery Co (Pty) Ltd v Gamaroff (CA 4/2007)

SA Metal & Machinery Co (Pty) Ltd v Gamaroff (CA 4/2007) [2009] ZALAC 18; [2010] 2 BLLR 136 (LAC) (5 August 2009)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

CA 4/2007

Judges

Leeuw JA, Zondo JP, Ndlovu AJA

The Labour Appeal Court held that the respondent was fairly dismissed after reaching the applicable retirement age of 65 under the fund rules.

• Retirement Age
• Automatic Unfair Dismissal
• Section 187 Lra
• Provident Fund Rules
• Procedural Fairness
• Employment Contract Terms

Potterill and Others v Minister of Safety and Security and Another (JA 47/2003)

Potterill and Others v Minister of Safety and Security and Another (JA 47/2003) [2007] ZALAC 22 (29 June 2007)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

JA 47/2003

Judges

Jappie, Zondo, Musi

The Labour Appeal Court dismissed an appeal about a withdrawn police motor-vehicle subsidy scheme, finding the arbitrator ignored governing regulations.

• Arbitration Review
• Gross Irregularity
• Employment Contract Terms
• Service Benefits
• Specific Performance
• Arbitration-review

Conly v Pasdech Resources (SA) Ltd (JS1137/2001)

Conly v Pasdech Resources (SA) Ltd (JS1137/2001) [2006] ZALC 98 (30 November 2006)

Court

Labour Court

Case number

JS1137/2001

Judge

MML Maya

The court found that the respondent's suspension of the applicant was justified and implemented in accordance with principles of fairness, as the applicant was informed of the reasons and retained his salary and benefits. The evidence established that there were sufficient grounds for an investigation into the applicant's conduct, and the suspension did not amount to a breach or repudiation of the employment contract. The applicant resigned before the investigation was concluded, preempting any disciplinary enquiry. The claims for a 13th cheque and leave pay were not supported by the pleading…

Source excerpt

• Unlawful Suspension
• Repudiation Of Contract
• Employment Contract Terms
• Leave Entitlement
• Bonus Claim
• Damages For Breach

Rust v Royalyard Holdings 11 (Proprietary) Limited and Another (J4380/01)

Rust v Royalyard Holdings 11 (Proprietary) Limited and Another (J4380/01) [2001] ZALC 162 (8 October 2001)

Court

Labour Court

Case number

J4380/01

Judge

E Revelas

Labour Court held that, absent a disciplinary code, a chairperson must be allowed to consider whether to permit legal representation at a hearing.

• Disciplinary Hearing Procedure
• Legal Representation
• Audi Alteram Partem
• Employment Contract Terms
• Disciplinary-hearing-procedure
• Legal-representation