Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Mabona v Exarro Ferroalloys (Pty) Ltd and Others (JR590/23) [2025] ZALCJHB 328 (30 July 2025)
The Labour Court reviewed and set aside a CCMA arbitration award after finding the commissioner failed to properly manage evidence relevant to fairness and consistency.
Sibanye Gold Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Another (JR2643/21) [2024] ZALCJHB 491; [2025] 3 BLLR 320 (LC); (2025) 46 ILJ 1400 (LC) (5 December 2024)
The court found that the commissioner did not commit a gross irregularity by limiting evidence regarding violence during the strike, as the applicant failed to indicate its relevance to the inconsistency challenge and did not call witnesses with personal knowledge. The applicant did not present admissible evidence distinguishing the conduct of NUM members and AMCU branch leadership from that of the dismissed AMCU members. The finding of inconsistency was reasonable given the evidence, including the employer's own Dangerous Weapons Policy and correspondence indicating lesser sanctions for simi…
Source excerpt
Ngunyule v MEIBC and Others (JR1595/19) [2023] ZALCJHB 17 (7 February 2023)
Review of an arbitration award rejecting an unfair dismissal claim for sexual harassment was dismissed. The court held the award was reasonable and dismissal fair.
NEHAWU obo Buqua v Department of Health (Western Cape) and Others (C335/2020) [2022] ZALCCT 42; (2022) 43 ILJ 2363 (LC); [2022] 11 BLLR 1035 (LC) (27 July 2022)
The court held that historical inconsistency cannot be invoked by an employee where the underlying misconduct constitutes serious criminal conduct such as theft. The applicant admitted to stealing a patient's property, and the employer, a state hospital, is entitled to dismiss employees for such conduct regardless of previous leniency. The arbitrator's finding that the dismissal was fair was reasonable, and the review grounds, which were intrinsically linked to the application of the inconsistency principle, lacked merit. The employer is not required to inform employees in advance that crimin…
Source excerpt
Servest Security a Division of Servest (Pty) Ltd v Nkwane and Others (JR1227/17) [2020] ZALCJHB 20 (31 January 2020)
The Labour Court reviewed and set aside an arbitration award after finding the employee’s own evidence showed he drank alcohol during his shift, justifying dismissal.
NEHAWU obo Skhosana and Others v Department of Health: Gauteng (JS903/15) [2018] ZALCJHB 201 (24 May 2018)
The Labour Court upheld dismissals of key shop stewards for an unprotected strike, but found dismissals of other employees substantively unfair and ordered reinstatement.
South African Clothing and Textile workers Union and Others v Filtafelt (Pty) Ltd (JS263/15) [2017] ZALCJHB 483 (14 November 2017)
The Labour Court held that employees who staged an unprotected strike were fairly dismissed, with no provocation, no inconsistency, and no procedural unfairness.
Mosikele v Mass Cash (Pty) Ltd t/a Qwaqwa Cash & Carry and Others (JR1045/2011) [2014] ZALCJHB 325 (27 August 2014)
The court found that the Commissioner had properly identified the dispute, understood the nature of the charges, and dealt with the substantial merits. The Applicant was given a fair opportunity to present his case, and the Commissioner’s conduct did not deprive him of a fair hearing. The reference to gross negligence was not a mischaracterisation that rendered the award unreasonable, as the facts supported a finding of serious misconduct. The inconsistency challenge failed because the employer differentiated between employees on legitimate grounds. The Commissioner’s decision was one that a…
Source excerpt
Parmalt South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation Mediation And Arbitration and Others (JR462/07) [2009] ZALCJHB 53 (3 February 2009)
Labour Court review of a CCMA arbitration award in a dismissal dispute. The court found the commissioner’s reasoning contradictory and substituted a finding that the dismissal was fair.
Parmalat South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR 462/07) [2009] ZALC 6; [2009] 6 BLLR 558 (LC) (3 February 2009)
The Labour Court found that the Commissioner committed a gross irregularity by issuing an award that was internally contradictory and not supported by the evidence. The Commissioner had found the Third Respondent guilty of dishonesty and that the employer had proven the elements of substantive fairness, but then concluded the dismissal was unfair due to inconsistency, despite no evidence of inconsistent application of the rule. The Court held that the Commissioner misunderstood the concept of inconsistency and required the employer to prove a negative, which was unreasonable. The decision was…
Source excerpt
Explore more
