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
Sethabela v Simba Proprietary Limited (J125/2024) [2024] ZALCJHB 222 (22 May 2024)
The Labour Court dismissed an urgent application challenging abscondment allegations, performance management, disability benefits, and harassment for lack of jurisdiction.
Department of Water and Sanitation v General Public Service Sectoral Bargaining Council and Others (PR 240/22) [2024] ZALCPE 4; (2024) 45 ILJ 1250 (LC) (1 March 2024)
The Labour Court set aside an arbitration award on pay progression and bonus, finding the employee had been promoted, needed a new performance agreement, and was not eligible for 2018/2019 rewards.
Wesbank, A Division of Firstrand Bank Limited v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (C293/2021) [2024] ZALCCT 1 (18 January 2024)
The Labour Court upheld a constructive dismissal award, finding Wesbank’s cumulative conduct made the employee’s working conditions intolerable.
Kekana v South African Social Security Agency Limpopo and Others (JR 1284/2017) [2022] ZALCJHB 47 (2 March 2022)
The Labour Court reviewed and set aside a CCMA condonation ruling, substituting it with an order granting condonation for a late unfair labour practice referral.
Bosch v JDG Group (Pty) Ltd and Others (JR578/14) [2021] ZALCJHB 171 (21 July 2021)
The court found that the applicant failed to establish that her resignation was due to intolerable conduct by the employer. The evidence showed that her complaints and grievances were directly correlated to her performance management when sales targets were not met, and not to any conduct that objectively rendered continued employment intolerable. The employer's actions were operationally justifiable and aimed at improving performance, not at creating an unbearable working environment. The applicant had alternative remedies available through the grievance procedure, which she did not fully pu…
Source excerpt
Jones v Commissioner for Mediation, Conciliation and Arbitration and Others (C709/2018) [2021] ZALCCT 10 (6 January 2021)
Labour Court review dismissed an employee’s challenge to a CCMA award, holding she failed to prove a reasonable expectation that her fixed-term contract would be renewed.
Mpane v Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (PRASA) and Others (J 3745/18) [2020] ZALCJHB 173; [2021] 1 BLLR 76 (LC); (2021) 42 ILJ 546 (LC) (9 June 2020)
The court found that the administrator's conduct in contemplating the applicant's dismissal, without complying with the contractual terms and incorporated PRASA policies, constituted a breach of the applicant's contract of employment. The applicant was entitled to specific performance, compelling the respondents to comply with all applicable contractual and policy-based procedures before any decision to terminate her employment. The court rejected the applicant's claim that the administrator lacked authority, as the proper forum for adjudicating the validity of the administrator's appointment…
Source excerpt
Public Servants Association obo Tloana v Public Health and Social Development Sectoral Bargaining Council and Others (JR642/14) [2019] ZALCJHB 191 (13 August 2019)
The Labour Court dismissed a review of an arbitration award for lateness and, alternatively, held the moderating committee acted within its mandate in recommending a lower performance rating.
Masemola and Others v Department of Education Limpopo Province (J2333/15) [2018] ZALCJHB 234 (25 June 2018)
The Labour Court refused to make a disputed settlement agreement an order of court, holding that the applicants’ entitlement under the agreement had to be resolved elsewhere.
Solidarity and Others v Denel (SOC) Ltd (JS241/11) [2017] ZALCJHB 107 (24 March 2017)
The Court found that Policy 53 of 2007 was valid, properly communicated, and applicable to all employees, including the applicants. The remuneration adjustment letters could not be read in isolation from the policy. The applicants were aware, or ought to have been aware, of the requirement to be employed at the time of bonus payout. As they had resigned before the bonus was approved and paid, they did not meet all conditions for entitlement. The exclusionary clauses in Policy 53 were binding, and no written exceptions were made. The applicants' alternative arguments failed, as the policy gove…
Source excerpt
Explore more
