South Africa Case Law

City of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality v Municipal Employees and Civil Servants Union and Others (2025/024810)

City of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality v Municipal Employees and Civil Servants Union and Others (2025/024810) [2025] ZALCJHB 331 (31 July 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

2025/024810

Judge

R Daniels

The court found that the strike notice issued by the Union on 19 February 2025 was defective as it failed to identify the dispute with reasonable clarity and did not provide the required seven days' notice to the City, as mandated by section 64(1)(d) of the Labour Relations Act. The applicant did not establish that all individual respondents were engaged in designated essential services, as its allegations were contradicted and not substantiated with specific evidence. The respondents provided a schedule identifying those not engaged in essential services, and the applicant failed to rebut th…

Source excerpt

• Protected Strike Action
• Essential Services
• Strike Notice Requirements
• Mutual Interest Disputes
• Interdict Proceedings

Mvelatrans (Pty) Ltd t/a Bojanala Bus Services v DEMAWUSA and Others (2025/076663)

Mvelatrans (Pty) Ltd t/a Bojanala Bus Services v DEMAWUSA and Others (2025/076663) [2025] ZALCJHB 226 (20 June 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

2025/076663

Judge

Daniels

The court found that the applicant failed to establish a prima facie right to the relief sought. The interpretation of clause 18.3 of the Main Collective Agreement does not require that the strike notice be issued only after the expiry of the cooling-off period; rather, the notice may be issued during the cooling-off period provided the strike commences after its expiry. This interpretation aligns with the least restrictive approach to the constitutional right to strike and the objects of the LRA. The jurisdictional ruling of the Bargaining Council does not preclude protected strike action on…

Source excerpt

• Protected Strike
• Collective Agreement Interpretation
• Cooling Off Period
• Jurisdictional Ruling
• Strike Notice Requirements

SBV Services Proprietary Limited v SASBO The Finance Union obo Members and Others (J3280/18)

SBV Services Proprietary Limited v SASBO The Finance Union obo Members and Others (J3280/18) [2018] ZALCJHB 304 (28 September 2018)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J3280/18

Judge

Mahosi

The court found that both demands were part of the unresolved dispute referred to the CCMA for conciliation. However, the demand for parity treatment seeks to reopen issues already regulated by the binding Wage Agreement and is thus prohibited by section 65(3)(a)(i) of the Labour Relations Act and the Recognition Agreement. The strike action in support of this demand is unprotected. In contrast, the demand relating to the performance-based distribution of salary increases remains unresolved between the parties and is not expressly regulated by the collective agreement. As there is no mechanis…

Source excerpt

• Protected Strike
• Collective Agreement
• Performance Based Salary Increases
• Parity Of Treatment
• Strike Notice Requirements

Sun International Limited and Another v SACCAWU and Others (J3455/17)

Sun International Limited and Another v SACCAWU and Others (J3455/17) [2017] ZALCJHB 501 (31 December 2017)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J3455/17

Judge

Steenkamp

The court found that the applicants had established a prima facie right to interim relief, as the evidence did not support the union's contention that the upgrade of the Kronos system constituted a unilateral change to terms and conditions of employment. The underlying dispute had been resolved by a collective agreement at the CCMA, precluding protected strike action under section 65(3)(a)(i) of the Labour Relations Act. Furthermore, the strike notice issued by SACCAWU failed to articulate any demands, rendering it defective and leaving the employer unable to respond or mitigate risks. The re…

Source excerpt

• Unprotected Strike
• Interim Interdict
• Collective Agreement
• Strike Notice Requirements
• Work Practices Vs Terms
• Labour Relations Act

Imperial Cargo (Pty) Ltd v DETAWU and Members (J2689-17)

Imperial Cargo (Pty) Ltd v DETAWU and Members (J2689-17) [2017] ZALCJHB 389 (25 October 2017)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J2689-17

Judge

B Whitcher

The Labour Court held that three strike demands were substantive issues barred by the Main Agreement, but a weekend-trip scheduling demand was a protected work-practice dispute.

• Protected Strike
• Collective Agreement Interpretation
• Substantive Vs Procedural Demands
• Bargaining Council Jurisdiction
• Strike Notice Requirements
• Protected-strike

Metsimaholo Local Municipality v South African Municipal Workers Union and Others (JA123/2014)

Metsimaholo Local Municipality v South African Municipal Workers Union and Others (JA123/2014) [2016] ZALAC 19 (11 May 2016)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

JA123/2014

Judges

Tlaletsi, C J Musi, Makgoka

The Labour Appeal Court held that a strike notice stating action would begin “at any point from 10 July 2014 onwards” was too vague and left the strike unprotected.

• Strike Notice Requirements
• Protected Strike
• Rule Nisi
• Procedural Compliance
• Strike-notice-requirements
• Unprotected-strike

National Union of Food Beverage Wine Spirits and Allied Workers (NUFBWSAW) and Others v Universal Product Network (Pty) Ltd; In re: Universal Product Network (Pty) Ltd v National Union of Food Beverage Wine Spirits and Allied Workers (NUFBWSAW) and Others (J2182/2015)

National Union of Food Beverage Wine Spirits and Allied Workers (NUFBWSAW) and Others v Universal Product Network (Pty) Ltd; In re: Universal Product Network (Pty) Ltd v National Union of Food Beverage Wine Spirits and Allied Workers (NUFBWSAW) and Others (J2182/2015) [2015] ZALCJHB 421; (2016) 37 ILJ 476 (LC); [2016] 4 BLLR 408 (LC) (9 November 2015)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J2182/2015

Judge

Van Niekerk

Labour Court discharged a rule nisi interdicting a strike, holding the union’s notice sufficiently clear and the evidence insufficient to show the strike had become unprotected.

• Protected Strike
• Strike Notice Requirements
• Strike Related Misconduct
• Collective Bargaining
• Interim Interdict
• Costs In Labour Disputes

Swissport (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd v National Transport Union and Others (J1940/15)

Swissport (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd v National Transport Union and Others (J1940/15) [2015] ZALCJHB 348 (9 October 2015)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J1940/15

Judge

Rabkin-Naicker

The Labour Court held that a refusal-to-bargain strike was protected and discharged the rule nisi, ordering the parties back to the CCMA for verification.

• Protected Strike
• Refusal To Bargain
• Recognition Agreement
• Strike Notice Requirements
• Collective Bargaining Threshold
• Protected-strike

Metsimaholo Local Municipality v South African Municipal workers Union and Others (J1561/2014)

Metsimaholo Local Municipality v South African Municipal workers Union and Others (J1561/2014) [2014] ZALCJHB 227 (27 June 2014)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J1561/2014

Judge

Tlhotlhalemaje

The Labour Court held that a municipality was entitled to seven days’ notice before a strike. Four days’ notice made the strike unlawful and unprotected.

• Unprotected Strike
• Strike Notice Requirements
• Urgent Interdict
• Collective Agreement
• Essential Services
• Unprotected-strike

Imperial Group (Pty) t/a Imperial Cargo Solutions v South African Transport And Allied Workers Union and Others (J2903/13)

Imperial Group (Pty) t/a Imperial Cargo Solutions v South African Transport And Allied Workers Union and Others (J2903/13) [2014] ZALCJHB 197; (2014) 35 ILJ 3154 (LC) (2 June 2014)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J2903/13

Judge

R Lagrange

The court found that the union's notice regarding the transportation of casual workers was ambiguous and did not meet the clarity required by section 64(4) of the LRA, rendering any strike action on that issue unprotected. However, the notice concerning the withdrawal of trip fees (shunting money) was sufficiently clear, and the union was entitled to embark on protected strike action on that issue, but only for the duration of the conciliation period as prescribed by section 64(1)(a). After the expiry of that period, a fresh strike notice would be required. The applicant was entitled to an in…

Source excerpt

• Strike Interdict
• Unilateral Change To Terms And Conditions
• Protected Strike
• Strike Notice Requirements
• Conciliation Period
• Collective Agreement