South Africa Case Law

Singamandla and Others v South African Public Workers Trade Union and Others (2025/085193)

Singamandla and Others v South African Public Workers Trade Union and Others (2025/085193) [2025] ZALCJHB 343 (1 August 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

2025/085193

Judge

R Daniels

The court found that the applicants failed to establish a clear right to an interdict restraining the strike action. The union's request for organisational rights did not comply with section 21(2) of the LRA, and the employer's referral to arbitration did not trigger the prohibition on strike action under section 65(1)(c). Section 65(2)(a) expressly permits strike action in pursuit of organisational rights, and the constitutional right to strike must be interpreted in the least restrictive manner. The applicants' attempt to frustrate the right to strike by hastily referring the dispute to arb…

Source excerpt

• Organisational Rights
• Protected Strike
• Interdict
• Picketing Rules
• Violence And Intimidation

NTM obo Chokoe and Others v PPO Workforce Staffing (Workforce Group (Pty) Ltd) (J302/18)

NTM obo Chokoe and Others v PPO Workforce Staffing (Workforce Group (Pty) Ltd) (J302/18) [2024] ZALCJHB 500 (11 December 2024)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J302/18

Judge

Tlhotlhalemaje

The Labour Court held that the applicants’ dismissals were procedurally and substantively fair after finding they engaged in an unprotected strike and ignored ultimatums.

• Unprotected Strike
• Procedural Fairness
• Substantive Fairness
• Organisational Rights
• Disciplinary Hearing
• Remedies For Unfair Dismissal

South African Clothing and Textile Workers Union v Bargaining Council for the Furniture Manufacturing Industry - KwaZulu-Natal and Others (DA9/22)

South African Clothing and Textile Workers Union v Bargaining Council for the Furniture Manufacturing Industry - KwaZulu-Natal and Others (DA9/22) [2024] ZALAC 20; (2024) 45 ILJ 1596 (LAC); [2024] 9 BLLR 976 (LAC) (2 May 2024)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

DA9/22

Judges

Waglay JP, Coppin JA, Savage AJA

The majority (Savage AJA, Waglay JP concurring) held that the appellant union's constitution expressly permitted the National Office Bearers or National Executive Committee to define additional industries as falling within its scope by resolution. The resolution demarcating the furniture industry as an 'other' interest group was made in terms of the registered constitution and did not constitute an amendment or change to the constitution as contemplated by section 101 of the Labour Relations Act. Therefore, no registration of the resolution was required, and the union was entitled to recruit…

Source excerpt

• Trade Union Scope
• Constitution Amendment
• Registration Requirements
• Organisational Rights
• Interpretation Of Union Constitutions

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

Bliss Brands (Pty) Ltd v NASA - Workers (JR391/22)

Bliss Brands (Pty) Ltd v NASA - Workers (JR391/22) [2024] ZALCJHB 95; [2024] 5 BLLR 484 (LC); (2024) 45 ILJ 1250 (LC) (4 March 2024)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR391/22

Judge

R Daniels

The Labour Court held that neither the Labour Relations Act nor the CCMA Rules prohibit the withdrawal of disputes by a referring party. The withdrawal of a dispute is not a functionary act and is akin to absolution from the instance, which does not bar reinstitution of proceedings. The applicant's arguments regarding the need for employer consent, the doctrine of election, and the undermining of collective bargaining were rejected. The LRA does not require a union to be bound by its election to arbitrate and does not prevent future pursuit of organisational rights. The commissioner committed…

Source excerpt

• Organisational Rights
• Withdrawal Of Dispute
• Collective Bargaining
• Doctrine Of Election
• Arbitration Procedure

Harmony Gold Company v National Union Of Metalworkers of South Africa and Others (JR2084/19)

Harmony Gold Company v National Union Of Metalworkers of South Africa and Others (JR2084/19) [2023] ZALCJHB 357 (5 December 2023)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR2084/19

Judge

T Manchu

The Labour Court set aside a CCMA award after finding the commissioner wrongly treated an employee relations policy as a collective agreement.

• Organisational Rights
• Collective Agreement Definition
• Jurisdiction Of Ccma
• Review Of Arbitration Award
• Error Of Law
• Labour-law

New Kleinfontein Goldmine (Pty) Ltd v Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union and Others (J 1457/2023)

New Kleinfontein Goldmine (Pty) Ltd v Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union and Others (J 1457/2023) [2023] ZALCJHB 300; (2024) 45 ILJ 159 (LC) (24 October 2023)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J 1457/2023

Judge

Prinsloo

The court found that the closed shop agreement between the applicant and NUM remains in force and has not been lawfully terminated in accordance with section 26(15)-(16) of the LRA. All employees in the bargaining unit, including those who hold dual membership with AMCU, are members of NUM by operation of the closed shop agreement and are bound by the collective agreements concluded between the applicant and NUM. The wage agreement contains a peace clause that expressly prohibits strike action over organisational rights. The prohibition applies to all employees subject to the agreement, regar…

Source excerpt

• Closed Shop Agreement
• Organisational Rights
• Peace Clause
• Strike Interdict
• Collective Agreement
• Majoritarian Principle

Banking, Insurance, Finance and Assurance Workers Union v Old Mutual Insure (Pty) Ltd (J 186/23)

Banking, Insurance, Finance and Assurance Workers Union v Old Mutual Insure (Pty) Ltd (J 186/23) [2023] ZALCJHB 72 (14 March 2023)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J 186/23

Judge

Tlhotlhalemaje

The court found that the applicant failed to satisfy the requirements of urgency under Rule 8, as the harm complained of was self-created due to undue delay in seeking relief. The termination of stop-order facilities occurred in September 2022, yet the applicant only approached the court months later without adequate explanation. The court held that the applicant could have obtained substantial redress through the procedures set out in section 21 of the LRA, which it was advised to follow but failed to do. The settlement agreement and subsequent arbitration award did not finally settle the di…

Source excerpt

• Organisational Rights
• Urgent Application Requirements
• Collective Agreements
• Stop Order Facilities

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

Lenmed Ethekwini Hospital v Commission for Conciliation,Mediation and Arbitration(CCMA) and Others (D1001/19)

Lenmed Ethekwini Hospital v Commission for Conciliation,Mediation and Arbitration(CCMA) and Others (D1001/19) [2022] ZALCD 27 (8 July 2022)

Court

Labour Court Durban

Case number

D1001/19

Judge

Lawrence

The court found that the arbitrator properly considered the relevant factors under Section 21 of the Labour Relations Act and was entitled to determine sufficient representativity based on the circumstances, not solely on numerical thresholds. The applicant's attempt to introduce new evidence regarding union membership after the arbitration was impermissible, as review proceedings are limited to the record before the arbitrator. Even if the additional affidavits were accepted, the reduction in union membership was negligible and did not materially affect the outcome. The arbitrator's award gr…

Source excerpt

• Organisational Rights
• Sufficient Representativity
• Review Of Arbitration Award
• Trade Union Membership
• Locus Standi
• Costs Discretion