South Africa Case Law

Govender v South African Police Service and Others (D726/2013)

Govender v South African Police Service and Others (D726/2013) [2015] ZALCD 23 (7 May 2015)

Court

Labour Court Durban

Case number

D726/2013

Judge

Mooki

The SAPS committed an unfair labour practice by failing to consider, evaluate, or provide reasons for the applicant’s non-appointment to post 2607. This conduct was not merely a procedural defect but had a substantive effect, as the applicant was the most meritorious candidate according to uncontested evidence. The Commissioner’s award of compensation was unreasonable given the circumstances and the evidence. The applicant is entitled to protected promotion with retrospective financial benefits, as the SAPS failed to justify its conduct and did not challenge the applicant’s merit. The court i…

Source excerpt

• Unfair Labour Practice
• Protective Promotion
• Failure To Evaluate
• Compensation
• Promotion Policy
• Condonation

Munsamy v SSSBC and Others (D437/09)

Munsamy v SSSBC and Others (D437/09) [2012] ZALCD 5 (25 May 2012)

Court

Labour Court Durban

Case number

D437/09

Judge

Cele

Labour Court review of an arbitration award about a failed promotion. The court upheld the award, finding no reviewable irregularity or unreasonableness.

• Promotion Policy
• Employment Equity
• Unfair Labour Practice
• Arbitration Review
• Procedural Fairness
• Promotion-policy

South African Police Services v Safety and Security Sectoral Bargaining Council and Others (JR 1682/08)

South African Police Services v Safety and Security Sectoral Bargaining Council and Others (JR 1682/08) [2012] ZALCJHB 10; [2012] 6 BLLR 596 (LC); (2012) 33 ILJ 1933 (LC) (20 January 2012)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR 1682/08

Judge

A.H. Swanepoel

The Labour Court reviewed and set aside an arbitration award for gross irregularity in a promotion dispute, finding no unfair labour practice and dismissing the claim.

• Unfair Labour Practice
• Promotion Policy
• Employment Equity
• Arbitration Review
• Interpretation Of Regulations
• Unfair-labour-practice

Solidarity obo Louw v South African Police Services and Others (JS 970/2010)

Solidarity obo Louw v South African Police Services and Others (JS 970/2010) [2011] ZALCJHB 118; [2012] 6 BLLR 637 (LC) (6 July 2011)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JS 970/2010

Judge

Cawe

The Court found that the SAPS's decision to appoint the Fourth Respondent was made in accordance with its Employment Equity Plan and relevant policies. The evidence showed that White males were over-represented at the relevant salary level, and the SAPS was striving for greater gender representivity. The Fourth Respondent, an Indian female, was suitably qualified and her appointment advanced the equity objectives without compromising service delivery. The Applicant's high interview score and experience were considered, but did not entitle him to automatic appointment. The Court held that the…

Source excerpt

• Employment Equity Act
• Unfair Discrimination
• Affirmative Action
• Promotion Policy
• Constitutional Equality
• Representivity Targets

Fredericks v Grobler NO and Others (C590/2007)

Fredericks v Grobler NO and Others (C590/2007) [2010] ZALC 18; [2010] 6 BLLR 644 (LC) (3 February 2010)

Court

Labour Court

Case number

C590/2007

Judge

Molahlehi

Labour Court review of a refused condonation application for a late unfair labour practice referral. The court upheld the refusal and dismissed the review.

• Condonation For Late Referral
• Prescription Act
• Unfair Labour Practice
• Promotion Policy
• Review Of Arbitration Award
• Labour-law

Saohatse v Vista University (J1496/98)

Saohatse v Vista University (J1496/98) [1999] ZALC 88 (3 June 1999)

Court

Labour Court

Case number

J1496/98

Judge

G J Marcus

The court found that the applicant's claim for a three-notch salary increase was not supported by the terms of the settlement agreement or the respondent's policy. The evidence showed that the applicant received the promotion and salary increases to which she was entitled under the policy, and any further increase would place her outside the salary scale for her position. The court held that exceptional circumstances for additional notches are intended as a reward for excellence, not for litigation. The relief sought by the applicant went beyond the express terms of the settlement agreement,…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Policy
• Salary Notch Increase
• Settlement Agreement Enforcement
• Remedies For Non Compliance