South Africa Case Law

Swanepoel v Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services (C160/2020)

Swanepoel v Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services (C160/2020) [2023] ZALCCT 37 (27 June 2023)

Court

Labour Court Cape Town

Case number

C160/2020

Judge

Lagrange

The court found that the inspecting judge lacked actual statutory authority to approve the applicant's eight notch salary increase after the 2008 amendments to the Correctional Services Act, which transferred such powers to the Chief Executive Officer. Even if authority were assumed, the requirements of the Public Service Act and Regulations for lawful salary advancement were not satisfied. The applicant's alternative reliance on ostensible authority and estoppel failed, as these doctrines cannot validate an unlawful act or confer powers not granted by statute. The respondent was entitled and…

Source excerpt

• Specific Performance
• Public Service Act
• Salary Adjustment
• Ostensible Authority
• Estoppel

Swanepoel v Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services (C 160/2020)

Swanepoel v Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services (C 160/2020) [2023] ZALCCT 41; (2023) 44 ILJ 2318 (LC) (27 June 2023)

Court

Labour Court Cape Town

Case number

C 160/2020

Judge

Lagrange

The Labour Court held that an eight-notch salary increase for a Judicial Inspectorate employee was unlawful and could be corrected under s 38(1) of the Public Service Act.

• Specific Performance
• Public Service Act
• Salary Adjustment
• Ostensible Authority
• Estoppel
• Remuneration Correction

NEHAWU obo Tshavhunga v CEO for Estate Agency Affairs Board N.O and Another (D254/19)

NEHAWU obo Tshavhunga v CEO for Estate Agency Affairs Board N.O and Another (D254/19) [2022] ZALCD 23 (22 June 2022)

Court

Labour Court Durban

Case number

D254/19

Judge

B. Purdon

The Labour Court dismissed NEHAWU’s bid to enforce a salary increase for a member, finding no binding agreement and holding the job grading process controlled the outcome.

• Remuneration Dispute
• Basic Conditions Of Employment Act
• Job Grading
• Unfair Labour Practice
• Salary Adjustment
• Employment Contract

Eskom Holdings SOC Limited v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (PR 26/20)

Eskom Holdings SOC Limited v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (PR 26/20) [2022] ZALCPE 6 (11 May 2022)

Court

Labour Court Port Elizabeth

Case number

PR 26/20

Judge

Z Lallie

The court found that the fourth respondent was entitled to the salary adjustment as a benefit arising from the employer's statutory compliance with the Employment Equity Act. The dispute fell within the definition of a benefit under section 186(2)(a) of the LRA, as interpreted in Apollo Tyres. The applicant's argument that the dispute was solely about remuneration did not render the third respondent's decision incorrect, as the same conduct may constitute an unfair labour practice, unfair discrimination, or a remuneration dispute. The jurisdiction of the CCMA was determined by the manner in w…

Source excerpt

• Unfair Labour Practice
• Jurisdiction Of Ccma
• Salary Adjustment
• Benefits
• Review Of Arbitration Award

National Union of Mineworkers and Others v Eskom Holdings SOC (JS257/15)

National Union of Mineworkers and Others v Eskom Holdings SOC (JS257/15) [2018] ZALCJHB 170 (8 May 2018)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JS257/15

Judge

M C Mamosebo

The Labour Court held that Eskom was bound by salary-adjustment letters issued on 10 May 2012 and rejected its unilateral-mistake defence.

• Breach Of Employment Contract
• Unilateral Mistake
• Salary Adjustment
• Acceptance Of Offer
• Breach-of-employment-contract
• Unilateral-mistake

Thannippara v Member of the Executive Council Department of Education Eastern Cape and Another (202/15)

Thannippara v Member of the Executive Council Department of Education Eastern Cape and Another (202/15) [2017] ZAECBHC 7 (14 September 2017)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Bhisho

Case number

202/15

Judge

N Conjwa

The court found that the respondents had wilfully disobeyed paragraphs 2, 3, and 4 of the consent order dated 4 December 2012. The respondents' argument that compliance was impossible due to pension fund rules was rejected, as they had agreed to the order with full knowledge of the circumstances. The respondents failed to pay the employer's pension contribution, adjust the applicant's monthly pension, and reassess leave pay and gratuity as required. Their subsequent claims of overpayment and impossibility were found to be disingenuous and did not absolve them of their obligations under the co…

Source excerpt

• Contempt Of Court
• Enforcement Of Court Orders
• Pension Benefits
• Salary Adjustment
• Leave Pay
• Gratuity

Phiri v City of Johannesburg and Another (J982/2013)

Phiri v City of Johannesburg and Another (J982/2013) [2015] ZALCJHB 351 (16 October 2015)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J982/2013

Judge

Phala

The Labour Court dismissed a Metro Police officer’s claim for salary adjustments and double pay under a 2008 MOA, finding he was not shown to qualify as a permanent employee.

• Basic Conditions Of Employment Act
• Contractual Entitlement
• Memorandum Of Agreement Interpretation
• Salary Adjustment
• Unfair Discrimination
• Basic-conditions-of-employment-act

Sithole and Others v South African Local Government Bargaining Council and Others (JR1940/12)

Sithole and Others v South African Local Government Bargaining Council and Others (JR1940/12) [2015] ZALCD 36 (12 June 2015)

Court

Labour Court Durban

Case number

JR1940/12

Judge

Nkutha-Nkontwana

The Labour Court dismissed a review challenging an arbitration award on alleged demotion, finding the applicants failed to prove they were appointed as LEOs.

• Demotion
• Review Of Arbitration Award
• Condonation
• Salary Adjustment
• Collective Agreement
• Labour-law

Minister of Correctional Services v Mbada NO and Others (J 2458/08, JR 2646/08)

Minister of Correctional Services v Mbada NO and Others (J 2458/08, JR 2646/08) [2011] ZALCJHB 240 (30 September 2011)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J 2458/08, JR 2646/08

Judge

Van Niekerk

The court found that the arbitrator correctly determined the department had acted unfairly by failing to implement the national commissioner's approval with retrospective effect for the DCE officials. The arbitrator's reasoning was based on the similarity of circumstances between DIU and DCE officials and the explicit reference in the approval to applying the same principles. The applicant's arguments regarding the lack of evidence and regulatory provisions were dismissed, as the authority for retrospective promotion was not in dispute. The arbitrator's decision was not so unreasonable as to…

Source excerpt

• Unfair Labour Practice
• Promotion
• Salary Adjustment
• Arbitration Review
• Retrospective Effect

National Prosecuting Authority and Others v Public Servants Association and Others (J456/08)

National Prosecuting Authority and Others v Public Servants Association and Others (J456/08) [2008] ZALC 145; [2009] 4 BLLR 362 (LC) ; (2009) 30 ILJ 1613 (LC) (19 November 2008)

Court

Labour Court

Case number

J456/08

Judge

Molahlehi

The court found that the arbitrator failed to take into account the legislative and regulatory framework governing salary adjustments following job evaluation in the public service, specifically the requirement that such increases may only be implemented if sufficient funding is available. The arbitrator's decision was based on considerations of equity and fairness, disregarding the statutory constraints and the context in which the regulations were promulgated. The court held that the arbitrator's conclusion was not one that a reasonable decision-maker could have reached, as it ignored the l…

Source excerpt

• Arbitration Review
• Job Evaluation
• Public Service Regulations
• Interest Vs Rights Dispute
• Collective Bargaining
• Salary Adjustment