South Africa Case Law

South African Professional Firearms Trainers Council NPC v Quality Council for Trades and Occupations and Others (097482/2024)

South African Professional Firearms Trainers Council NPC v Quality Council for Trades and Occupations and Others (097482/2024) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1388 (2 October 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

097482/2024

Judge

M.P. Motha

High Court struck an urgent interim interdict application off the roll, finding the applicant had not shown urgency around a firearm-training skills programme.

• Interim Interdict
• Urgency Rule 6 12
• Delegation Of Statutory Powers
• Skills Development Act
• National Qualifications Framework
• Interim-interdict

EFL South Africa NPC trading as "Education South Africa" v Minister of Home Affairs and Others (Reasons) (7204/2021)

EFL South Africa NPC trading as "Education South Africa" v Minister of Home Affairs and Others (Reasons) (7204/2021) [2024] ZAWCHC 317 (20 September 2024)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

7204/2021

Judge

Kusevitsky

The court found that the applicant and its members, as private colleges providing English as a foreign language tuition, are entitled to provisional registration with the Department of Higher Education and Training, provided they comply with the terms of their existing letters of provisional registration. The court held that, for the purposes of the Immigration Regulations, the applicant and its members qualify as 'learning institutions' so long as they remain registered. The court granted interim relief to ensure that study visa applications for prospective students of the applicant and its…

Source excerpt

• Immigration Regulations
• Study Visa Adjudication
• Registration Of Private Colleges
• Constitutional Right To Education
• Interim Relief
• Skills Development Act

Jet Education Services NPO v Manufacturing Engineering and Related Services Sector Education and Training Authority (2023/070358,2023/071032)

Jet Education Services NPO v Manufacturing Engineering and Related Services Sector Education and Training Authority (2023/070358,2023/071032) [2024] ZAGPJHC 709 (2 August 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2023/070358,2023/071032

Judge

F Snyckers

The court held that both the JET and MerSETA applications are matters arising from the Skills Development Act, as they concern the legality of discretionary grants and contracts awarded by MerSETA in fulfilment of its statutory mandate. The statutory ouster in section 31(1) applies broadly to all disputes causally connected to the SDA, not only those directly invoking its provisions. The court rejected the argument that parties could confer jurisdiction on the High Court by consent where a statutory ouster applies. The contracts and disputes in question are central to the statutory functions…

Source excerpt

• Skills Development Act
• Exclusive Jurisdiction
• Self Review
• Discretionary Grants
• Administrative Action
• Jurisdictional Ouster

Manufacturing Engineering & Related Services Sector Education & Training Authority v Social Enterprise Trust (2023-023483)

Manufacturing Engineering & Related Services Sector Education & Training Authority v Social Enterprise Trust (2023-023483) [2024] ZAGPJHC 237; (2024) 45 ILJ 1330 (GJ) (8 March 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2023-023483

Judge

Moorcroft

The High Court does not have jurisdiction to entertain the application as the matter arises from the Skills Development Act, which confers exclusive jurisdiction on the Labour Court. The applicant's reliance on constitutional principles does not override the statutory jurisdictional scheme. The applicant was repeatedly warned about the jurisdictional issue but persisted, justifying a punitive costs order. The proceedings are accordingly referred to the Labour Court under section 31(3) of the Act, and the applicant is ordered to pay costs on an attorney and client scale.

Source excerpt

• Skills Development Act
• Jurisdiction Of Labour Court
• Punitive Costs
• Review Of Administrative Action

Minister of Higher Education, Science and Technology v Construction Education and Training Authority and Others (JA27/2020)

Minister of Higher Education, Science and Technology v Construction Education and Training Authority and Others (JA27/2020) [2021] ZALAC 39; [2022] 1 BLLR 72 (LAC); (2022) 43 ILJ 374 (LAC) (20 October 2021)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

JA27/2020

Judges

Waglay JP, Davis JA, Coppin JA

The Labour Appeal Court held that the resolution appointing Werkmans Attorneys to act for the first respondent was invalid because it failed to secure the required majority and impermissibly included proxy votes, which are expressly prohibited by the first respondent's Constitution. The second respondent, as proposer, did not vote, and the withdrawal of support by four directors further undermined the resolution's validity. Without a valid resolution, the application lacked proper authorisation and could not be sustained. The Court declined to exercise its discretion to grant a just and equit…

Source excerpt

• Locus Standi
• Board Resolution Validity
• Skills Development Act
• Proxy Voting
• Just And Equitable Remedy

Construction Education and Training Authority (CETA) and Another v Minister of Higher Education, Science and Technology and Others (J113/20)

Construction Education and Training Authority (CETA) and Another v Minister of Higher Education, Science and Technology and Others (J113/20) [2020] ZALCJHB 52 (25 February 2020)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J113/20

Judge

GN Moshoana

The court found that the Minister failed to comply with the statutory requirement of consultation under section 15(4) of the Skills Development Act before appointing an administrator to the CETA. The Minister did not demonstrate, as a matter of fact, that consultation would have been detrimental to the CETA's capacity to perform its functions. The evidence presented did not substantiate the claim that delay caused by consultation would result in harm or loss to the CETA. The Minister's reliance on constitutional provisions was misplaced, as the duty to consult arises from statute, not the Con…

Source excerpt

• Skills Development Act
• Jurisdictional Facts
• Consultation Requirements
• Principle Of Legality
• Rationality Review

Business Unity South Africa v Minister of Higher Education and Training and Others (JA111/2018)

Business Unity South Africa v Minister of Higher Education and Training and Others (JA111/2018) [2019] ZALAC 68; [2020] 1 BLLR 1 (LAC); (2020) 41 ILJ 137 (LAC) (16 October 2019)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

JA111/2018

Judges

Davis, Coppin, Murphy

The Labour Appeal Court found that the Minister failed to provide any clear or cogent justification for re-promulgating Regulation 4(4) after it had been declared unlawful by the Labour Court. The Minister's answering affidavit merely referenced slides and documents without articulating how the context had changed or why the decision was now rational. The absence of a substantive explanation meant the Minister's conduct was irrational and violated the principle of legality, which demands that exercises of public power be rational and not arbitrary. Accordingly, the decision to re-promulgate R…

Source excerpt

• Regulation Promulgation
• Principle Of Legality
• Irrationality Of Administrative Action
• Skills Development Act
• Issue Estoppel

Minister of Higher Education and Training and Another v Business Unity South Africa and Another (JA70/16)

Minister of Higher Education and Training and Another v Business Unity South Africa and Another (JA70/16) [2017] ZALAC 69; (2018) 39 ILJ 160 (LAC) (1 November 2017)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

JA70/16

Judges

Tlaletsi, Kathree-Setiloane, Phatshoane

The Labour Appeal Court held that the Minister's obligation to consult the National Skills Authority before promulgating the 2012 Grant Regulations was mandatory and could not be substituted by discussions with NEDLAC or individual members. The Authority is a distinct statutory body with broader representation, and the statutory requirements for consultation, including notice and voting, were not met. The Minister failed to afford the Authority an opportunity to comment on material changes, and consultation after the decision was made did not suffice. The sweeping mechanism in Regulation 3(12…

Source excerpt

• Consultation Requirements
• Skills Development Act
• Subordinate Legislation
• Public Interest Review
• Jurisdictional Facts

Singhala v Ernst and Young Incorporated and Another (J2046/2017)

Singhala v Ernst and Young Incorporated and Another (J2046/2017) [2017] ZALCJHB 518; [2019] 5 BLLR 494 (LC); (2019) 40 ILJ 1083 (LC) (12 September 2017)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J2046/2017

Judge

GN Moshoana

The Labour Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain claims for unlawful or invalid dismissal outside the remedies provided by the Labour Relations Act. The applicant's case, despite attempts to frame it as a constitutional violation, is fundamentally a labour dispute governed by the LRA. The LRA provides comprehensive remedies for unfair and automatically unfair dismissals, and attempts to disavow these remedies do not create jurisdiction for the Labour Court to grant relief outside the statutory framework. The Skills Development Act does not apply in the absence of a tripartite learnership agre…

Source excerpt

• Jurisdiction Of Labour Court
• Automatically Unfair Dismissal
• Section 157 Lra
• Skills Development Act
• Discrimination
• Costs Orders

Minister of Higher Education and Training and Another v South African Commercial, Catering and Allied Workers Union and Others (JA13/17)

Minister of Higher Education and Training and Another v South African Commercial, Catering and Allied Workers Union and Others (JA13/17) [2017] ZALAC 27; (2017) 38 ILJ 1967 (LAC) (16 May 2017)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

JA13/17

Judges

Waglay JP, Davis JA, Landman JA

The Labour Appeal Court held that the Minister unlawfully placed W&RSETA under administration under s15 of the SDA. The appeal and cross-appeal were dismissed.

• Skills Development Act
• Principle Of Legality
• Administrative Action
• Review Of Ministerial Decision
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Skills-development-act