Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
A.K v Right to Care NPC (JS597/21) [2023] ZALCJHB 182; (2023) 44 ILJ 2200 (LC) (5 June 2023)
The Labour Court held that the employer was not liable under section 60 of the EEA for alleged sexual harassment and dismissed the employee’s claim.
V v Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (PRASA) and Others (P60/2018) [2020] ZALCPE 6 (7 February 2020)
The Labour Court dismissed an appeal against a CCMA sexual harassment award, holding the WhatsApp video was sent by mistake and did not prove harassment.
P.E v Ikwezi Municipality and Another (828/2011) [2016] ZAECGHC 20; [2016] 2 All SA 869 (ECG); [2016] 7 BLLR 723 (ECG); (2016) 37 (ILJ) 1799 (ECG); 2016 (5) SA 114 (ECG) (31 March 2016)
The court found that the second defendant, as Corporate Services Manager and immediate superior to the plaintiff, abused his position of authority to commit a sexual assault in the workplace. The employer placed him in a position of trust and control over the plaintiff's working conditions, which facilitated the opportunity for the assault. The court held that the common law must be developed, in line with constitutional values of dignity and equality, to impose vicarious liability on employers for sexual harassment perpetrated by superior employees. The employer also breached its direct duty…
Source excerpt
Ehlers v Bohler Uddeholm Africa (Pty) Ltd (JS296/09) [2010] ZALC 117; (2010) 31 ILJ 2383 (LC) (13 August 2010)
The Court found that the true reason for the applicant's dismissal was her status as a transsexual undergoing gender reassignment, not operational requirements or incompatibility. The respondent's requirement that she present as male and the subsequent termination of her employment constituted unfair discrimination on the grounds of sex and gender. The respondent failed to prove that reinstatement would be intolerable or impracticable. The applicant's dismissal was therefore automatically unfair under section 187(1)(f) of the LRA. The Court ordered reinstatement but dismissed claims for compe…
Source excerpt
Mokoena and Another v Garden Art (Pty) Ltd and Another (JS373/06) [2007] ZALC 90; [2008] 5 BLLR 428 (LC); (2008) 29 ILJ 1196 (LC) (3 December 2007)
Labour Court claim over alleged workplace sexual harassment dismissed; only one applicant proved harassment, but the employer had acted promptly and reasonably.
Irvin & Johnson Limited v Trawler & Line Fishing Union and Others (C1126/2002) [2002] ZALC 105; (2003) 24 ILJ 565 (LC); 2003 (3) SA 212 (LC); [2003] 4 BLLR 379 (LC) (17 December 2002)
The Labour Court held that anonymous, voluntary HIV testing of employees did not fall within section 7(2) of the Employment Equity Act.
Explore more
