South Africa Case Law

Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union and Others v Safety and Security Sectoral Vunene Mining (Pty) Ltd (J 566/20)

Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union and Others v Safety and Security Sectoral Vunene Mining (Pty) Ltd (J 566/20) [2020] ZALCJHB 114 (7 July 2020)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J 566/20

Judge

Mabaso

The Labour Court held that the employer’s exclusion of AMCU members was an unlawful, unprotected lockout because no demand preceded it.

• Unprotected Lockout
• Trade Union Representative Capacity
• Urgency
• No Work No Pay
• Strike Action
• Compensation For Lockout

UTATU SARWHU and Others v Autopax Passenger Services (SOC) Ltd and Another (J1931/2013)

UTATU SARWHU and Others v Autopax Passenger Services (SOC) Ltd and Another (J1931/2013) [2013] ZALCJHB 331 (11 November 2013)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J1931/2013

Judge

Snyman

The existence of directly conflicting judgments on similar facts demonstrates that reasonable judges may differ on the outcome, justifying the granting of leave to appeal. The interpretation and application of the Moloto judgment to employer lock-outs is a novel and complex issue that requires resolution by the Labour Appeal Court. Additionally, the question of what constitutes a 'demand' for the purposes of strike action or lock-out in collective bargaining is unsettled, with conflicting judgments. In light of these factors, the applicants have shown reasonable prospects that another court m…

Source excerpt

• Unprotected Lockout
• Collective Bargaining
• Remuneration During Lockout
• Leave To Appeal Test
• Conflicting Judgments

Modiba and Others v Contro Cupboards (J2583/06)

Modiba and Others v Contro Cupboards (J2583/06) [2007] ZALCJHB 63 (15 June 2007)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J2583/06

Judge

A Van Niekerk

The Labour Court held that a lockout ceased to be protected once workers unconditionally tendered their services, entitling them to pay until dismissal.

• Unprotected Lockout
• Remuneration Claim
• Strike Action
• Disciplinary Suspension
• Labour-law
• Lockout

Klienboy and Others v Contro Cupboards (J 2583/06)

Klienboy and Others v Contro Cupboards (J 2583/06) [2007] ZALC 173 (15 June 2007)

Court

Labour Court

Case number

J 2583/06

Judge

A Van Niekerk

The Labour Court held that a lockout lost protection once employees unconditionally tendered their services, entitling them to remuneration for the exclusion period.

• Unprotected Lockout
• Remuneration Claim
• Strike Action
• Employment Contract Breach
• Unprotected-lockout
• Remuneration-claim

3M SA (Pty) Ltd v South Africa Commercial Catering and Allied Workers Union (JA22/00)

3M SA (Pty) Ltd v South Africa Commercial Catering and Allied Workers Union (JA22/00) [2001] ZALAC 2; [2001] 5 BLLR 483 (LAC); (2001) 22 ILJ 1092 (LAC) (15 February 2001)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

JA22/00

Judges

RMM Zondo, EL Goldstein, DM Davis

The Labour Appeal Court held that the employer was not obliged to pay wages for the period 23 January to 5 February 1997 because the employees only tendered partial services during a protected strike, and the exceptio non adimpleti contractus applied. The Court rejected the respondents' reliance on general fairness and constitutional principles, finding that the Labour Relations Act did not require payment for partial performance during a protected strike. For the period 6 to 14 February 1997, the Court found that the employees had tendered full services and the employer's exclusion of them f…

Source excerpt

• Protected Strike
• Lockout
• Exceptio Non Adimpleti Contractus
• Remuneration For Strike Period
• Unprotected Lockout
• Fair Labour Practices