South Africa Case Law

City of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality v Municipal Employees and Civil Servants Union and Others (2025/024810)

City of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality v Municipal Employees and Civil Servants Union and Others (2025/024810) [2025] ZALCJHB 331 (31 July 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

2025/024810

Judge

R Daniels

The court found that the strike notice issued by the Union on 19 February 2025 was defective as it failed to identify the dispute with reasonable clarity and did not provide the required seven days' notice to the City, as mandated by section 64(1)(d) of the Labour Relations Act. The applicant did not establish that all individual respondents were engaged in designated essential services, as its allegations were contradicted and not substantiated with specific evidence. The respondents provided a schedule identifying those not engaged in essential services, and the applicant failed to rebut th…

Source excerpt

• Protected Strike Action
• Essential Services
• Strike Notice Requirements
• Mutual Interest Disputes
• Interdict Proceedings

Umhlathuze Local Municipality v South African Municipal Workers Union and Others (2025/095121)

Umhlathuze Local Municipality v South African Municipal Workers Union and Others (2025/095121) [2025] ZALCCT 50 (2 July 2025)

Court

Labour Court Cape Town

Case number

2025/095121

Judge

M T M Phehane

Urgent strike interdict application struck off for non-compliance with section 68(3) of the LRA and lack of urgency; costs awarded against the municipality.

• Strike Interdict
• Urgency Requirements
• Section 68 Lra
• Essential Services
• Picketing Rules
• Strike-interdict

City of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality v Municipal Employees Civil Servants Union (MECSU) and Others (2025/082833)

City of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality v Municipal Employees Civil Servants Union (MECSU) and Others (2025/082833) [2025] ZALCJHB 230 (20 June 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

2025/082833

Judge

Prinsloo

The court found that while MECSU complied with the procedural requirements for a protected strike, the substantive limitations of the Labour Relations Act prohibit essential service workers, such as Metro police officers, from striking. The demands in the strike notice of 27 May 2025 pertained specifically to essential service employees and must be resolved through arbitration, not industrial action. The court held that the intended strike and any conduct in furtherance of such strike, including picketing, relating to Metro police officers, is interdicted. Regarding the demand for permanent e…

Source excerpt

• Essential Services
• Protected Strike
• Strike Interdict
• Contempt Of Court
• Mutual Interest Dispute
• Arbitration Vs Strike

National Education Health and Allied Workers Union obo Members v Essential Services Committee and Others (JR1269/2020)

National Education Health and Allied Workers Union obo Members v Essential Services Committee and Others (JR1269/2020) [2025] ZALCJHB 88; (2025) 46 ILJ 1232 (LC) (5 March 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR1269/2020

Judge

Daniels

The Labour Court granted condonation but dismissed NEHAWU’s review of an Essential Services Committee ruling about strike limits in an Electoral Commission minimum services agreement.

• Essential Services
• Minimum Services Agreement
• Jurisdiction Of Esc
• Strike Limitation
• Condonation
• Statutory Interpretation

Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union and Others v Nkomati Anthracite (Pty) Ltd (JS614/20)

Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union and Others v Nkomati Anthracite (Pty) Ltd (JS614/20) [2024] ZALCJHB 406 (11 October 2024)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JS614/20

Judge

S Sethene

The Labour Court found that Nkomati Anthracite misread Covid-19 regulations, unlawfully deducted salaries without consent, and unfairly dismissed employees.

• Unfair Dismissal
• Unlawful Salary Deduction
• Covid 19 Regulations
• Collective Agreement
• Essential Services
• Costs Order

Western Province Caterers Health Care Division (Pty) Limited v Food and Allied Workers Union and Others (C99/2024)

Western Province Caterers Health Care Division (Pty) Limited v Food and Allied Workers Union and Others (C99/2024) [2024] ZALCJHB 174 (19 April 2024)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

C99/2024

Judge

R G Lagrange

The Labour Court discharged an interim interdict against a threatened strike and ordered each party to bear its own costs after the union undertook not to strike.

• Essential Services
• Strike Interdict
• Organisational Rights
• Costs Award
• Strike-interdict
• Essential-services

Minister for the Public Service and Administration and Another v National Education, Health and Allied Workers Union and Others (J 281/23)

Minister for the Public Service and Administration and Another v National Education, Health and Allied Workers Union and Others (J 281/23) [2023] ZALCJHB 106 (17 April 2023)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J 281/23

Judge

Tlhotlhalemaje

The Labour Court dismissed NEHAWU’s leave to appeal against an urgent interdict, finding no reasonable prospects of success and no useful live dispute remained.

• Strike Interdict
• Essential Services
• Leave To Appeal Test
• Defective Strike Notice
• Labour Relations Act Section 65
• Leave-to-appeal

NEHAWU v Minister For The Public Service And Administration and Others (JA19/2023)

NEHAWU v Minister For The Public Service And Administration and Others (JA19/2023) [2023] ZALAC 7; [2023] 6 BLLR 487 (LAC); (2023) 44 ILJ 1207 (LAC) (13 March 2023)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

JA19/2023

Judges

Waglay JP, Savage, Gqamana AJJA

The Labour Appeal Court found that NEHAWU's strike notice was unlawfully broad, including essential services employees and entities outside the bargaining unit, in breach of section 65(1)(d)(i) of the LRA. NEHAWU failed to take adequate steps to exclude these categories, resulting in exceptional circumstances and irreparable harm to the employer and the public. However, the Court held that the right to strike for non-essential service employees should not be eroded by a blanket interdict. The section 18 order was warranted only against NEHAWU members employed in essential services and at SASS…

Source excerpt

• Strike Interdict
• Essential Services
• Section 18 Execution
• Collective Bargaining
• Constitutional Right To Strike
• Public Service Regulations

Working On Fire (Pty) Ltd v National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA) and Others (DA5/2021)

Working On Fire (Pty) Ltd v National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA) and Others (DA5/2021) [2022] ZALAC 114; (2022) 43 ILJ 2764 (LAC); [2023] 1 BLLR 39 (LAC) (21 October 2022)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

DA5/2021

Judges

Waglay JP, Coppin JA, Kathree-Setiloane AJA

Labour Appeal Court upheld a CCMA arbitration award on essential-service wage disputes, finding the arbitrator’s hypothetical approach was a valid exercise of discretion.

• Essential Services
• Interest Arbitration
• Refusal To Bargain
• Joint And Several Liability
• Minimum Wage
• Review Of Arbitration Award

Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality v South African Local Government Bargaining Council and Others (JR853/18)

Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality v South African Local Government Bargaining Council and Others (JR853/18) [2022] ZALCJHB 272 (4 October 2022)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR853/18

Judge

Nkutha-Nkontwana

The court found that the dispute concerned a mutual interest arising from a unilateral change to terms and conditions of employment, specifically the reduction of the nightshift allowance. Despite procedural irregularities in the referral, the matter was properly conciliated and arbitrated under section 74(4) of the LRA, as the respondent employees were essential services workers precluded from striking. The evidence established that the previous nightshift allowance rate had become an entrenched benefit through long-standing practice, and the employer's unilateral reduction was impermissible…

Source excerpt

• Essential Services
• Unilateral Change To Terms
• Mutual Interest Dispute
• Arbitration Jurisdiction
• Collective Bargaining
• Nightshift Allowance