South Africa Case Law

Mathane and Others v National Regulator for Compulsory Specifications and Others (2025/000072)

Mathane and Others v National Regulator for Compulsory Specifications and Others (2025/000072) [2025] ZALCJHB 6 (16 January 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

2025/000072

Judge

M Makhura

Urgent labour court application by striking employees was struck off for lack of urgency; the court found no unlawful deductions, only lawful no-work-no-pay withholding.

• No Work No Pay
• Urgent Interdict
• Unlawful Deductions
• Basic Conditions Of Employment Act
• Protected Strike
• No-work-no-pay

Gqithekhaya and Others v Amathole District Municipality (EL 601/2021)

Gqithekhaya and Others v Amathole District Municipality (EL 601/2021) [2022] ZAECELLC 20; [2022] 4 All SA 106 (ECLD); [2022] 11 BLLR 1066 (ELC); 2023 (2) SA 227 (ECEL); (2023) 44 ILJ 627 (ECL) (5 August 2022)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, East London Local Court

Case number

EL 601/2021

Judge

Hartle

The court held that while the respondent was entitled in principle to recover remuneration paid to employees for periods during which they participated in an unprotected strike, such recovery must comply with section 34 of the BCEA. This requires either the employees' written consent or a court order, arbitration award, or collective agreement authorizing the deductions. The respondent's unilateral deductions constituted unlawful self-help and violated the applicants' rights to fair labour practices and access to courts. Section 34(5) of the BCEA does not provide a standalone remedy for emplo…

Source excerpt

• Unlawful Deductions
• No Work No Pay
• Basic Conditions Of Employment Act
• Self Help
• Set Off
• Fair Labour Practices

O`Reilly v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration, Johannesburg and Others (JR2395/19)

O`Reilly v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration, Johannesburg and Others (JR2395/19) [2022] ZALCJHB 33 (28 February 2022)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR2395/19

Judge

VG Mkwibiso

The applicant failed to establish constructive dismissal as she did not exhaust alternative remedies available to her, such as lodging a grievance or approaching a competent court regarding the alleged unlawful deductions. The intolerability threshold was not met, as her resignation was not directly triggered by the deductions but occurred during the disciplinary hearing. The CCMA lacked jurisdiction to determine the claim for breach of section 34(1) of the BCEA, as such matters fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Labour Court. Consequently, the review application was dismissed, and…

Source excerpt

• Constructive Dismissal
• Automatically Unfair Dismissal
• Unlawful Deductions
• Ccma Jurisdiction
• Section 34 Bcea
• Review Of Arbitration Award

Buz v Minister of Defence and Military Veterans and Others (C493/2019)

Buz v Minister of Defence and Military Veterans and Others (C493/2019) [2021] ZALCCT 69 (21 September 2021)

Court

Labour Court Cape Town

Case number

C493/2019

Judge

Harvey

The court held that only those preliminary points properly pleaded and recorded in the pretrial minute were before it. The Labour Court has jurisdiction to determine all four claims, as the BCEA applies to SANDF members and the applicant's claims are sourced in contract, the Constitution, and regulations. The exclusion of SANDF members from the LRA does not preclude jurisdiction over contractual and constitutional claims. Prescription applies to debts due more than three years before the statement of claim was filed; thus, claims for unlawful deductions and constructive dismissal have not pre…

Source excerpt

• Prescription Act
• Jurisdiction Of Labour Court
• Unlawful Deductions
• Performance Bonus
• Commuted Overtime
• Constructive Dismissal

Khanyile v South African Social Security Agency (SASSA) and Others (8695/2017)

Khanyile v South African Social Security Agency (SASSA) and Others (8695/2017) [2019] ZAKZPHC 74 (18 November 2019)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

8695/2017

Judge

Chetty

The High Court held that SASSA could not allow deductions from a disability grant without the beneficiary’s written authority and ordered repayment and an interdict.

• Social Assistance Act
• Unlawful Deductions
• Regulation 26a Compliance
• Interdictory Relief
• Social-assistance-act
• Unlawful-deductions

DEMAWUSA and Others v City of Johannesburg (J1849/2019)

DEMAWUSA and Others v City of Johannesburg (J1849/2019) [2019] ZALCJHB 368; (2020) 41 ILJ 912 (LC); [2020] 6 BLLR 574 (LC) (7 November 2019)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J1849/2019

Judge

Van Niekerk

The Labour Court lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate claims of unlawful suspension and unlawful deductions from remuneration where the applicants do not rely on fairness but solely on lawfulness. The applicants' claim regarding suspension is based on an alleged breach of a collective agreement, which must be resolved through the dispute resolution mechanisms prescribed by section 24 of the LRA, namely conciliation and arbitration. The claim regarding unlawful deductions under section 34 of the BCEA must be pursued through the enforcement mechanisms established by the BCEA, typically involving a…

Source excerpt

• Jurisdiction Of Labour Court
• Unlawful Suspension
• Unlawful Deductions
• Collective Agreement Disputes
• Basic Conditions Of Employment Act
• Final Interdict

Lewarne v Fochem International (Pty) Ltd (1073/18)

Lewarne v Fochem International (Pty) Ltd (1073/18) [2019] ZASCA 114; (2019) 40 ILJ 2473 (SCA); [2020] 1 BLLR 33 (SCA) (18 September 2019)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

1073/18

Judges

Tshiqi, Wallis, Zondi, Mocumie, Plasket

The SCA held that a salary claim under an employment contract fell within concurrent civil and Labour Court jurisdiction under section 77(3) of the BCEA.

• Jurisdiction Of High Court
• Exclusive Jurisdiction Of Labour Court
• Contract Of Employment
• Unlawful Deductions
• Basic Conditions Of Employment Act
• Labour-law

Maboza v Matjhabeng Local Municipality and Another (J1034/16)

Maboza v Matjhabeng Local Municipality and Another (J1034/16) [2017] ZALCJHB 427 (23 November 2017)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J1034/16

Judge

Lagrange

The court found that the applicant's entitlement to the higher salary had already been determined by the arbitration award, and issue estoppel prevented her from relitigating that question. However, the lawfulness of the deductions was not decided by the arbitrator. The deductions made by the municipality were not authorised under section 34(1) of the BCEA, as there was no written agreement, law, collective agreement, court order, or arbitration award permitting them. Section 34(5)(a) did not apply because the overpayment was not due to a calculation error but to an irregular appointment. The…

Source excerpt

• Unlawful Deductions
• Issue Estoppel
• Basic Conditions Of Employment Act
• Municipal Finance Management Act
• Condonation
• Arbitration Award Enforcement

Mazibuko and Others v JJF Construction CC and Others (JS1016/16)

Mazibuko and Others v JJF Construction CC and Others (JS1016/16) [2017] ZALCJHB 225 (13 June 2017)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JS1016/16

Judge

Steenkamp

The Labour Court upheld exceptions to a vague statement of claim, but allowed the unrepresented applicants time to amend after the respondents provide relevant employment documents.

• Exception Procedure
• Automatic Unfair Dismissal
• Piercing Corporate Veil
• Jurisdictional Prerequisite
• Employment Contracts
• Unlawful Deductions

Zinzobe and Others v Fahrenheit Seafood and Grill (J561/14)

Zinzobe and Others v Fahrenheit Seafood and Grill (J561/14) [2016] ZALCJHB 386 (6 October 2016)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J561/14

Judge

T Ntshebe

The court found that both applications were premised on alleged breaches of a collective agreement extended to non-parties. The agreement contains a clear and mandatory dispute resolution procedure, requiring complaints to be investigated by the Bargaining Council and, if unresolved, to proceed to con-arb. The Labour Court does not have jurisdiction to adjudicate these claims directly, as the applicants must first exhaust the remedies provided by the Bargaining Council. The precedent in Pardon Rukwaya & 31 Others v The Kitchen Bar Restaurant was followed, confirming that the court cannot assu…

Source excerpt

• Collective Agreement Enforcement
• Jurisdiction Of Labour Court
• Dispute Resolution Mechanism
• Minimum Wage Claims
• Unlawful Deductions