South Africa Case Law

Innovative Staffing Solutions (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Employment and Labour and Others (JR2749/22)

Innovative Staffing Solutions (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Employment and Labour and Others (JR2749/22) [2025] ZALCJHB 141 (3 April 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR2749/22

Judge

Daniels

The court found that the registrar and deputy registrar followed a rational and fair process in determining the representativeness of the parties to the Bargaining Council, as required by the Labour Relations Act. The certificate issued was a valid determination under section 49, and the deputy registrar was lawfully empowered to act under section 108(2) of the LRA. The applicant's arguments regarding the wrong statutory section, discrepancies in figures, lack of independent data sources, and absence of a representation process for non-parties were rejected as lacking substance or statutory b…

Source excerpt

• Collective Bargaining
• Extension Of Collective Agreements
• Representativeness Determination
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Majoritarianism
• Delegation Of Statutory Functions

NEHAWU v Minister of Public Service and Administration and Others (J419/23)

NEHAWU v Minister of Public Service and Administration and Others (J419/23) [2025] ZALCJHB 59 (20 February 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J419/23

Judge

N Tshisevhe

The Labour Court dismissed NEHAWU’s contempt application, finding the respondents had complied by positively engaging on the wage demands and acting in good faith.

• Contempt Of Court
• Settlement Agreement
• Collective Bargaining
• Majoritarianism
• Costs Order
• Contempt-of-court

National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA) v Motor Industry Staff Association (MISA) and Others (JA15/2023)

National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA) v Motor Industry Staff Association (MISA) and Others (JA15/2023) [2024] ZALAC 73; (2025) 46 ILJ 109 (LAC) (6 September 2024)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

JA15/2023

Judges

Musi JA, Van Niekerk JA, Govindjee AJA

The Labour Appeal Court held that the MIBCO constitution does not contain a tacit or implied term that a party whose representivity falls below the 5% threshold automatically ceases to be a member. The Court found that the arbitrator erred in law by importing such a term, as the requirements of obviousness and business efficacy were not met. The constitution's silence on the consequences of falling below the threshold was deliberate, leaving the matter for MIBCO to resolve internally. The Court emphasized that collective agreements are not ordinary contracts and must be interpreted in light o…

Source excerpt

• Collective Agreements
• Implied Terms
• Bargaining Council Membership
• Majoritarianism
• Interpretation Of Collective Agreements

Mziba v Osborn Engineered Products SA (Pty) Ltd (JS110-21)

Mziba v Osborn Engineered Products SA (Pty) Ltd (JS110-21) [2024] ZALCJHB 528 (5 June 2024)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JS110/21

Judge

M T M Phehane

The Court found that the retrenchment agreement was a collective agreement as defined by section 213 of the LRA and that the jurisdictional facts for extension under section 23(1)(d) were satisfied. The applicant was identified in the agreement, expressly bound by its terms, and the majority unions were parties. The inclusion of non-unionised employees did not alter the agreement's character. The principle of majoritarianism and the objectives of the LRA—orderly collective bargaining, labour peace, and workplace democratisation—supported the binding nature of the agreement. The applicant's co…

Source excerpt

• Collective Agreement
• Majoritarianism
• Retrenchment
• Section 23 Lra
• Section 189a Lra
• Jurisdiction

Golden Arrow Bus Services (Pty) Ltd and Another v Minister of Employment and Labour and Others (C 409/2021)

Golden Arrow Bus Services (Pty) Ltd and Another v Minister of Employment and Labour and Others (C 409/2021) [2023] ZALCCT 17; [2023] 8 BLLR 775 (LC); (2023) 44 ILJ 1715 (LC) (4 May 2023)

Court

Labour Court Cape Town

Case number

C 409/2021

Judge

Z Lallie

The Labour Court held that the 2021 road passenger transport main collective agreement was not validly concluded in terms of the council’s constitution and set aside the Minister’s extension.

• Extension Of Collective Agreements
• Jurisdictional Requirements
• Procedural Fairness
• Majoritarianism
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Labour-law

Anglo American Coal South Africa v CCMA and Others (JR 2115/20)

Anglo American Coal South Africa v CCMA and Others (JR 2115/20) [2023] ZALCJHB 57; (2023) 44 ILJ 1500 (LC) (13 March 2023)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR 2115/20

Judge

Nindi

The Labour Court found that the commissioner’s decision to grant organisational rights to the Coalition was reasonable and justified under section 21(8C) of the LRA. The requirements of section 21(8C)(b) are disjunctive, allowing rights to be granted if a union represents either a significant interest or a substantial number of employees. The Coalition’s historical presence and stable membership supported the finding that it represented a significant interest in the workplace, even though its representivity was below the threshold set in the recognition agreement. The commissioner correctly c…

Source excerpt

• Organisational Rights
• Threshold Agreements
• Minority Union Rights
• Review Of Arbitration Award
• Collective Bargaining
• Majoritarianism

Association of Mine Workers and Construction Union and Others v Royal Bafokeng Platinum Mine Limited and Others

The Court dismissed the appeal because the majority held that section 23(1) of the Constitution does not confer a right to individual consultation in retrenchment dismissals and that section 189 of the Labour Relations Act validly and exhaustively regulates the consultation process; the consultation scheme is procedurally fair and constitutionally permissible, so no basis was shown to invalidate section 189(1).

Source excerpt

• Fair labour practices
• Retrenchment
• Consultation in operational-requirements dismissals
• Majoritarianism
• Collective agreements
• Freedom of association

Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union v Sibanye Gold Limited t/a Sibanye Stillwater and Others (J 353/19; J 380/19)

Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union v Sibanye Gold Limited t/a Sibanye Stillwater and Others (J 353/19; J 380/19) [2019] ZALCJHB 89; (2019) 40 ILJ 1607 (LC); [2019] 8 BLLR 802 (LC) (20 March 2019)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J 353/19; J 380/19

Judge

Prinsloo

The court held that section 23(1)(d) of the Labour Relations Act does not require that the extension of a collective agreement to non-party employees be incorporated at the time of the agreement's conclusion. The extension may be effected subsequently, provided the majority threshold and other statutory requirements are met. The retrospective application of the extension is permissible, and once extended, the collective agreement binds non-party employees as if they were parties to the agreement. The deprivation of the right to strike is a lawful consequence of majoritarianism, and AMCU membe…

Source excerpt

• Collective Bargaining
• Extension Of Collective Agreement
• Majoritarianism
• Right To Strike
• Peace Clause
• Retrospective Application

Lanxess Chrome Mining (Pty) Ltd v National Union of Mine Workers and Others (J3472/18)

Lanxess Chrome Mining (Pty) Ltd v National Union of Mine Workers and Others (J3472/18) [2018] ZALCJHB 410 (11 December 2018)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J3472/18

Judge

D Mahosi

The Court finds that there are material factual disputes regarding the majority status of NUMSA at the time the collective agreements were concluded and whether those agreements validly bind NUMSA and its members, thereby prohibiting the strike under section 65(3)(a)(i) of the LRA. Given the conflicting evidence on union membership numbers and the circumstances of the agreements, the matter cannot be resolved on affidavit alone. Rule 7(7)(b) of the Labour Court Rules empowers the Court to refer such disputes for oral evidence. Accordingly, the application is referred for oral evidence to dete…

Source excerpt

• Protected Strike
• Collective Agreement
• Majoritarianism
• Section 65 Lra
• Oral Evidence
• Bad Faith In Collective Bargaining

National Union of Mineworkers and Others v Anglo Gold Ashanti Limited and Another (J3627/18)

National Union of Mineworkers and Others v Anglo Gold Ashanti Limited and Another (J3627/18) [2018] ZALCJHB 385; [2019] 1 BLLR 54 (LC); (2019) 40 ILJ 407 (LC) (19 October 2018)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J3627/18

Judge

P Nkutha-Nkontwana

The court held that the section 197(6) agreement, concluded between Anglo Gold, JMCA, and majority trade unions, is a collective agreement as defined by section 213 of the LRA. The agreement was reached through a legitimate section 189A consultation process and is capable of extension to non-signatory unions and their members under section 23(1)(d), consistent with the majoritarianism principle. The Hospital is not a separate workplace for purposes of the LRA; rather, the South African Region constitutes the workplace, where NUM is a minority union. The applicants' argument that the agreement…

Source excerpt

• Collective Agreements
• Majoritarianism
• Section 197 Transfer
• Section 23 Extension
• Retrenchment Consultation
• Workplace Definition