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
Van Rensburg v Freedom Property Fund Ltd (5421/2023) [2025] ZALMPPHC 133 (7 July 2025)
The High Court partly upheld a claim for unpaid contractual payments and attorney’s fees, but dismissed a director’s-fees claim under section 163.
HAB Personnel Services CC v Commissioner for The South African Revenue Service (A168/2020) [2022] ZAGPPHC 852 (8 November 2022)
The High Court dismissed HAB Personnel Services CC’s appeal against SARS, upholding PAYE, SDL, penalties, and interest on payments to alleged contractors.
South African Broadcasting Corporation (SOC) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR745/16) [2017] ZALCJHB 87 (8 March 2017)
The court held that the individual respondents were not employees of the applicant but independent contractors. The written contracts expressly defined the relationship as independent contracting, with payment per shift, freedom to refuse work, and the ability to contract with third parties. There was no direct supervision or control typical of employment, and the respondents were not integrated into the applicant's organization or entitled to employee benefits. Economic dependence alone was insufficient to establish employment. Section 200A did not apply as the respondents earned above the B…
Source excerpt
Total SA (Pty) Ltd v National Bargaining Council for the Chemical Industry and Others (JR 1854/09) [2012] ZALCJHB 92; (2013) 34 ILJ 1006 (LC) (31 August 2012)
The court found that the third respondent was not an employee but an independent contractor. The evidence showed that he was paid based on invoices for services rendered, with fluctuating amounts and no fixed hours. He was not prohibited from working elsewhere and was not economically dependent on the applicant. The presence of payslips and statutory deductions was attributed to a payroll system error, not to an employment relationship. There was insufficient evidence of control or supervision by the applicant over the third respondent's work. Consequently, the bargaining council lacked juris…
Source excerpt
J & J Freeze Trust v Statutory Council for the Squid and Related Fisheries of SA and Others (P530/09) [2011] ZALCJHB 61; [2011] 11 BLLR 1068 (LC); (2011) 32 ILJ 2966 (LC) (20 July 2011)
The court found that the objective facts established an employment relationship between the applicant and the third respondent. The written contract, probationary period, permanent appointment, and three-month notice period indicated employment rather than independent contracting. The third respondent was economically dependent on the applicant, managed the crew on behalf of the applicant, and was integrated into the applicant’s business. The applicant’s witnesses were found unreliable, and the respondent’s version was more probable. Industry practice was not determinative, and each case must…
Source excerpt
Bezer v Cruises International CC (C535/2001) [2002] ZALC 101; (2003) 24 ILJ 1372 (LC); [2003] 6 BLLR 535 (LC) (1 December 2002)
The court found that the applicant, Ms Jauch, had deliberately entered into an arrangement whereby she established a close corporation and concluded an agency agreement between the respondent and the CC. The agency agreement was not entered into by Ms Jauch in her personal capacity but by the CC, a distinct juristic entity. The evidence showed that the applicant was fully aware of the tax benefits anticipated from the CC and had ample opportunity to consider and obtain advice on the arrangement. The substantive terms of the agency agreement, while resembling an employment relationship, were n…
Source excerpt
LAD Brokers (Pty) Ltd v Mandla (CA14/00) [2001] ZALAC 9; 2002 (6) SA 43 (LAC); [2001] 9 BLLR 993 (LAC); (2001) 22 ILJ 1813 (LAC) (29 June 2001)
The Labour Appeal Court held that a labour broker was liable as employer under section 198(2) of the LRA, and upheld an unfair dismissal award.
Explore more
