South Africa Case Law

Singamandla and Others v South African Public Workers Trade Union and Others (2025/085193)

Singamandla and Others v South African Public Workers Trade Union and Others (2025/085193) [2025] ZALCJHB 343 (1 August 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

2025/085193

Judge

R Daniels

The court found that the applicants failed to establish a clear right to an interdict restraining the strike action. The union's request for organisational rights did not comply with section 21(2) of the LRA, and the employer's referral to arbitration did not trigger the prohibition on strike action under section 65(1)(c). Section 65(2)(a) expressly permits strike action in pursuit of organisational rights, and the constitutional right to strike must be interpreted in the least restrictive manner. The applicants' attempt to frustrate the right to strike by hastily referring the dispute to arb…

Source excerpt

• Organisational Rights
• Protected Strike
• Interdict
• Picketing Rules
• Violence And Intimidation

City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality and Another v South African Municipal Workers Union and Others (J 1074 / 23)

City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality and Another v South African Municipal Workers Union and Others (J 1074 / 23) [2023] ZALCJHB 257; (2023) 44 ILJ 2703 (LC); [2023] 12 BLLR 1247 (LC) (18 September 2023)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J 1074 / 23

Judge

S Snyman

The Labour Court confirmed a rule nisi declaring an unprotected strike and interdicting violent and intimidating conduct by SAMWU members, with costs.

• Unprotected Strike
• Interdict
• Collective Agreement Enforcement
• Violence And Intimidation
• Costs Award
• Labour Relations Act

Blue Print Housing (PTY) Ltd and Another v Loeto and Others (048243/22)

Blue Print Housing (PTY) Ltd and Another v Loeto and Others (048243/22) [2022] ZAGPJHC 1000 (5 December 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

048243/22

Judge

N Muvangua

Urgent application for a final interdict granted against alleged interference, intimidation, and violence at a property development site and head office.

• Urgent Interdict
• Property Development Dispute
• Violence And Intimidation
• Alternative Remedy
• Balance Of Convenience
• Urgent-interdict

WBHO Construction (Pty) Ltd v Buwa and Others (5521/2015)

WBHO Construction (Pty) Ltd v Buwa and Others (5521/2015) [2015] ZAECGHC 115 (28 October 2015)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown

Case number

5521/2015

Judge

N G Beshe

The High Court granted a rule nisi and interim interdict protecting WBHO’s construction site from alleged intimidation, violence, obstruction, and unlawful access.

• Urgent Interdict
• Rule Nisi
• Site Access Dispute
• Violence And Intimidation
• Locus Standi
• Service And Notice

Sawash (Pty) Ltd and Others v Independent Catering Commercial Farm Workers Union (ICCAFAWU) and Others (846/06)

Sawash (Pty) Ltd and Others v Independent Catering Commercial Farm Workers Union (ICCAFAWU) and Others (846/06) [2006] ZANWHC 57 (8 September 2006)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

846/06

Judge

A A Landman

The court found that while the dispute contained elements of a labour dispute, the acts alleged by the applicants—violence, intimidation, and obstruction—are criminal and delictual in nature and thus fall within the jurisdiction of the High Court. However, the applicants failed to provide sufficient evidence to establish the requirements for a final interdict. The respondents' version, supported by the presence of police and the absence of arrests or charges, was accepted in accordance with the Plascon-Evans rule. The court concluded that the applicants did not prove a clear right or injury,…

Source excerpt

• Interdict
• Jurisdiction Of High Court
• Picketing
• Violence And Intimidation
• Final Interdict Requirements