South Africa Case Law

Kekana v Stapelberg NO and Others (JR2280/21)

Kekana v Stapelberg NO and Others (JR2280/21) [2025] ZALCJHB 178 (19 May 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR2280/21

Judge

Daniels

The court found that the commissioner’s award was reasonable and supported by the totality of the evidence. The applicant, as a manager trained in company policies, failed to follow procedures and actively assisted in fraudulent transactions, resulting in significant financial loss. The commissioner did not ignore evidence of other individuals’ involvement but correctly found that inconsistency in discipline did not render the dismissal unfair. The applicant’s arguments were assessed piecemeal and did not demonstrate that the award was one which no reasonable commissioner could reach. The app…

Source excerpt

• Review Of Arbitration Award
• Unfair Dismissal
• Reasonableness Test
• Inconsistency In Discipline
• Gross Misconduct

FAWU obo Zulu and Others v Grobler N.O (D26/2021)

FAWU obo Zulu and Others v Grobler N.O (D26/2021) [2025] ZALCD 16 (4 April 2025)

Court

Labour Court Durban

Case number

D26/2021

Judge

K Allen-Yaman

The court found that the delay in delivering the record was significant but largely attributable to failures by the second respondent and miscommunications among FAWU officials, not the employees. The employees demonstrated active interest in pursuing the review, and their prospects of success were compelling, given the arbitrator's reliance on unsworn statements and failure to consider relevant defences and evidence of inconsistent discipline. The interests of justice required reinstatement of the review application and condonation for the late delivery of the record and institution of the r…

Source excerpt

• Condonation For Late Review
• Reinstatement Of Review Application
• Protected Strike Dismissal
• Arbitration Award Review
• Procedural Fairness
• Inconsistency In Discipline

Bidvest Protea Coin (Pty) Ltd v South African Transport and Allied Workers Union and Others (JR74/24)

Bidvest Protea Coin (Pty) Ltd v South African Transport and Allied Workers Union and Others (JR74/24) [2025] ZALCJHB 17 (16 January 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR74/24

Judge

B Ramji

The Labour Court found that the Commissioner misconceived the legal inquiry into inconsistency by failing to properly assess the similarities and differences between the dismissed employees and the comparators. The Commissioner ignored relevant evidence, relied on speculative and irrelevant material, and failed to apply her mind to the central question of whether discipline was applied inconsistently. The award was unsupported by sufficient evidence and was so unreasonable that no reasonable decision-maker could have reached the same conclusion. Given disputed facts and incomplete evidence, t…

Source excerpt

• Unfair Dismissal
• Inconsistency In Discipline
• Review Of Arbitration Award
• Code Of Good Practice On Dismissals

Fempower Personnel (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR742/2024)

Fempower Personnel (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR742/2024) [2025] ZALCJHB 20 (8 January 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR742/2024

Judge

T Mphahlane

The court found that the Commissioner did not commit a gross irregularity in relying on the Employee's direct evidence regarding inconsistency, as it was uncontested and not hearsay. The Commissioner correctly applied the legal principles regarding the employer's onus to rebut credible allegations of inconsistency. However, the Commissioner erred in awarding six months' compensation without considering the fixed-term nature of the Employee's contract and the absence of evidence of impaired dignity or humiliation. The compensation should be limited to the actual loss of income, namely the bala…

Source excerpt

• Unfair Dismissal
• Inconsistency In Discipline
• Compensation For Unfair Dismissal
• Review Of Arbitration Award
• Fixed Term Contract

Bidvest Steiner (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation & Arbitration and Others (J1849/2022)

Bidvest Steiner (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation & Arbitration and Others (J1849/2022) [2024] ZALCJHB 483 (21 November 2024)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J1849/2022

Judge

R Lagrange

The Labour Court reviewed and set aside an arbitration award, holding that the employee’s dismissal for gross negligence was substantively fair.

• Substantive Fairness Of Dismissal
• Inconsistency In Discipline
• Gross Negligence
• Code Of Good Practice Dismissal
• Escalation Of Operational Issues
• Substantive-fairness-of-dismissal

Bidvest Steiner (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1849/2022)

Bidvest Steiner (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1849/2022) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1188 (21 October 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

JR1849/2022

Judge

R Lagrange

The Labour Court reviewed and set aside an arbitration award, holding that the employee’s dismissal for gross negligence was substantively fair.

• Substantive Fairness Of Dismissal
• Inconsistency In Discipline
• Gross Negligence
• Code Of Good Practice Dismissal
• Escalation Of Operational Issues
• Labour-law

NUFBWSAW obo Mhlambi v Coca-Cola Beverages South Africa (Pty) Ltd and Others (JR 1610/20)

NUFBWSAW obo Mhlambi v Coca-Cola Beverages South Africa (Pty) Ltd and Others (JR 1610/20) [2023] ZALCJHB 327 (23 November 2023)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR 1610/20

Judge

S Snyman

Labour Court upheld a CCMA award finding dismissal fair for dishonest use of wrong part numbers, rejecting claims of instruction, training gaps, and inconsistency.

• Unfair Dismissal
• Dishonesty
• Review Of Arbitration Award
• Inconsistency In Discipline
• Gross Misconduct
• Review-of-arbitration-award

Pioneer Foods v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1685/19)

Pioneer Foods v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1685/19) [2023] ZALCJHB 132 (28 April 2023)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR1685/19

Judge

M Makhura

The court found that the arbitrator's conclusion that the employee was guilty of negligence but not forgery or dishonesty was reasonable and supported by the evidence. The employee had been trained in the procedure by Dagume and had applied it consistently for five years, with no evidence of intentional misconduct or intent to defraud. The company failed to prove that the employee intentionally breached the rule. The arbitrator correctly considered the company disciplinary code, which prescribes a final written warning for negligence, and took into account mitigating factors such as length of…

Source excerpt

• Unfair Dismissal
• Review Of Arbitration Award
• Substantive Fairness
• Disciplinary Code
• Inconsistency In Discipline

ATC South Africa Wireless Infrastructure (PTY) Ltd v Masakale and Others

ATC South Africa Wireless Infrastructure (PTY) Ltd v Masakale and Others [2022] ZALCJHB 376 (29 November 2022)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR387/2019

Judge

Matyolo

The Labour Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal, finding no reasonable prospects that the Labour Appeal Court would reach a different result.

• Leave To Appeal
• Review Of Arbitration Award
• Unfair Dismissal
• Inconsistency In Discipline
• Leave-to-appeal
• Labour-law

Lonmin Mine v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1084/21)

Lonmin Mine v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1084/21) [2022] ZALCJHB 57 (15 March 2022)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR1084/21

Judge

Deane

The court found that the Third Respondent failed to discharge the evidentiary burden required to establish inconsistency in the application of discipline. Merely mentioning names of other employees without providing details or evidence was insufficient to create a prima facie case. The Commissioner erred in finding substantive unfairness based on inconsistency, as there was no credible evidence that other employees were treated differently for similar misconduct. The seriousness of the misconduct—sleeping on duty underground in a mine with dangerous equipment—justified dismissal under the app…

Source excerpt

• Inconsistency In Discipline
• Substantive Fairness
• Evidentiary Burden
• Dismissal For Misconduct