South Africa Case Law

National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa and Others v Chabo and Joubert Air Conditioning (Pty) Ltd (JS432/20)

National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa and Others v Chabo and Joubert Air Conditioning (Pty) Ltd (JS432/20) [2025] ZALCJHB 255 (26 June 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JS432/20

Judge

M Makhura

The Labour Court found a retrenchment substantively unfair for lack of meaningful consultation, rational basis, and fair selection criteria. Reinstatement and compensation were ordered.

• Retrenchment
• Section 189a Consultation
• Selection Criteria
• Substantive Fairness
• Compensation And Reinstatement
• Remedies For Unfair Dismissal

Langa and Another v Smollan Sales and Marketing (Pty) Ltd (J 50/21)

Langa and Another v Smollan Sales and Marketing (Pty) Ltd (J 50/21) [2025] ZALCJHB 86 (3 March 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J 50/21

Judge

Ngwenya

The court found that the respondent demonstrated a genuine operational need for restructuring, driven by increased weekend sales requirements and economic pressures resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. The applicants did not dispute the necessity of weekend coverage or the restructuring itself, but objected to the reduction in salary. The evidence and common cause facts established that cost reduction was necessary to mitigate financial risk and ensure sustainability. The consultation process was extensive and alternatives were offered. The court concluded that the dismissal for operational…

Source excerpt

• Unfair Dismissal
• Operational Requirements
• Retrenchment
• Section 189a Consultation
• Covid19 Economic Impact

Modise v Road Accident Fund (102594/2024)

Modise v Road Accident Fund (102594/2024) [2024] ZALCJHB 489 (3 December 2024)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

102594/2024

Judge

M Kumalo

The court found that the Respondent failed to comply with the procedural requirements for retrenchment under section 189 and 189A of the Labour Relations Act. The Applicants were placed on lengthy precautionary suspensions and were only notified of redundancy two years after the initial retrenchment process was purportedly commenced. The Respondent did not provide evidence of proper consultation or outcomes of the process, nor did it furnish the Applicants with the required information. The court held that the Applicants were entitled to urgent relief to prevent retrenchment prior to proper c…

Source excerpt

• Retrenchment Procedure
• Precautionary Suspension
• Section 189a Consultation
• Urgent Interdict

Industrial Oleo Chemical Products v National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa and Others (DA05/2023)

Industrial Oleo Chemical Products v National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa and Others (DA05/2023) [2024] ZALAC 53; [2025] 1 BLLR 1 (LAC); (2025) 46 ILJ 328 (LAC) (23 October 2024)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

DA05/2023

Judges

Savage, Nkutha-Nkontwana, Mlambo

The Labour Appeal Court held that, notwithstanding the facilitation process in large-scale retrenchments under section 189A, a referral to conciliation is mandatory before a valid referral to the Labour Court can take place. The Court relied on the Constitutional Court's decision in Intervalve, which established that conciliation is an indispensable jurisdictional precondition for adjudication of unfair dismissal disputes. The Court rejected the Labour Court's interpretation and the reasoning in Bell Equipment, finding that facilitation and conciliation are functionally distinct and that the…

Source excerpt

• Operational Requirements Dismissal
• Section 189a Consultation
• Conciliation Precondition
• Jurisdiction Of Labour Court
• Large Scale Retrenchment
• Interpretation Of Lra

SATAWU obo Murulani and Others v First Help (Pty) Ltd (593/2021)

SATAWU obo Murulani and Others v First Help (Pty) Ltd (593/2021) [2024] ZALCJHB 216 (30 May 2024)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JS 593/2021

Judge

A van Niekerk

The Labour Court dismissed an application for condonation after a year-long delay in referring an unfair dismissal dispute, finding the explanation inadequate and prospects unproven.

• Condonation
• Unfair Dismissal
• Operational Requirements Retrenchment
• Section 189a Consultation
• Late Referral
• Procedural Fairness

Road Accident Fund v National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA) and Another (J283/2024)

Road Accident Fund v National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA) and Another (J283/2024) [2024] ZALCJHB 201; (2024) 45 ILJ 2059 (LC); [2024] 11 BLLR 1183 (LC) (13 May 2024)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J283/2024

Judge

R G Lagrange

The court found that the strike notice issued by NUMSA was defective as it failed to specify the demands clearly, rendering the intended strike unprotected. The notice was generic and did not provide the RAF with sufficient information to avert the strike, especially in light of NUMSA's press release which expanded the scope of demands beyond those referred to conciliation. The court held that NUMSA's locus standi to call for strike action was not restricted by its scope of membership, as employees may heed a union's call to strike even if not lawful members. The objection regarding the autho…

Source excerpt

• Strike Interdict
• Protected Strike
• Union Scope And Membership
• Defective Strike Notice
• Section 189a Consultation
• Locus Standi

Moses and Others v Fusion Wireless (Pty) Ltd t/a Sonic Telecoms and Others (C135/2021)

Moses and Others v Fusion Wireless (Pty) Ltd t/a Sonic Telecoms and Others (C135/2021) [2024] ZALCCT 5 (6 February 2024)

Court

Labour Court Cape Town

Case number

C135/2021

Judge

Rabkin-Naicker

The Labour Court found the applicants’ retrenchments substantively unfair and ordered Herotel to reinstate them retrospectively into similar positions.

• Unfair Dismissal
• Retrenchment
• Section 189a Consultation
• Selection Criteria
• Section 197 Transfer
• Unfair-dismissal

NUM obo Mashilane and Others v Micronized Product (Pty) Ltd and Another (JS935/20)

NUM obo Mashilane and Others v Micronized Product (Pty) Ltd and Another (JS935/20) [2024] ZALCJHB 525 (24 January 2024)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JS935/20

Judge

M T M Phehane

The court found that the respondents had established a genuine operational rationale for retrenchment, namely declining sales volumes worsened by the Covid-19 pandemic. The consultation process was facilitated by the CCMA and the respondents made repeated, reasonable efforts to engage NUM, which failed to participate meaningfully or provide alternatives. The applicants conceded the declining sales figures and abandoned their procedural unfairness claim. The evidence presented by the applicants was inconsistent, unsupported, and largely consisted of versions not put to the respondents' witness…

Source excerpt

• Retrenchment
• Procedural Fairness
• Substantive Fairness
• Section 189a Consultation
• Selection Criteria
• Costs Order

Nkosi v Prestige Pressing and Components (PTY) Ltd (JS466/20)

Nkosi v Prestige Pressing and Components (PTY) Ltd (JS466/20) [2022] ZALCJHB 224 (18 August 2022)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JS466/20

Judge

Nkutha-Nkontwana

The applicant was a member of AUSA, a recognized trade union, and was represented during the section 189A consultation process. The retrenchment agreement concluded as a result of this process constitutes a collective agreement under section 213 of the LRA and is binding on the applicant in terms of section 23(1)(b). The applicant did not challenge the validity of the collective agreement, and therefore cannot seek relief from its consequences in this forum. The Labour Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the claim as all issues in dispute were resolved by the binding collective agreement.

Source excerpt

• Collective Agreement
• Retrenchment
• Section 189a Consultation
• Jurisdiction
• Trade Union Representation

Association Mineworkers and Construction Union obo the AMCU Members v T.W. Civils and Earthmoving (PTY) Ltd and Another (J 1066/2020)

Association Mineworkers and Construction Union obo the AMCU Members v T.W. Civils and Earthmoving (PTY) Ltd and Another (J 1066/2020) [2022] ZALCJHB 223 (8 August 2022)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J 1066/2020

Judge

Van Niekerk

The court found that the respondents complied with the operative parts of the order by reinstating the employees and facilitating the required consultations. Any claim for remuneration arising from the reinstatement is contractual and cannot be enforced through contempt proceedings. The applicants abandoned their main contentions regarding reinstatement and retrenchment procedure, leaving only the issue of back pay, which does not constitute contempt. The application was brought with undue delay and without full disclosure of relevant facts, justifying an adverse costs order.

Source excerpt

• Contempt Of Court
• Reinstatement
• Section 189a Consultation
• Remuneration Claim
• Costs Award