|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| March 2017 |
|
|
Reported
The applicant (employer) was liable under s 60 EEA for failing to prevent and properly address a manager’s sexual harassment of the respondent.
* Employment Equity Act s 60 – employer liability where employee’s conduct contravenes Act – obligations to report, consult relevant parties, eliminate conduct and take reasonably practicable preventative measures.
* Sexual harassment – defined as unwelcome sexual conduct constituting unfair discrimination; employer’s duty to investigate and take protective steps on notice.
* Procedural and evidentiary issues – credibility findings; meaning of "immediately" in s 60(1); distinction between s 60(2) remedial steps and s 60(4) preventative measures.
|
7 March 2017 |
| February 2017 |
|
|
Reported
Reconstructed record permitted appeal; employees found to have deserted but dismissal was disproportionate, compensation awarded.
* Labour law – adequacy of reconstructed arbitration record – pragmatic approach where parties have reconstructed and long delay militates against remittal; * Review – unreasonableness/perversity of factual findings – award set aside where contemporaneous documents and probabilities render arbitrator's conclusion untenable; * Misconduct and sanction – desertion established but dismissal disproportionate given mitigating circumstances; * Compensation – award in lieu of reinstatement where reinstatement not sought or appropriate.
|
28 February 2017 |
|
A court order imposing a deadline to "prove" representativity does not preclude later factual adjudication of whether the deadline was met.
* Labour law – recognition agreements – court consent order imposing a resolutive condition as to representativity – such an order does not preclude subsequent factual disputes about whether the condition was met.
* Dispute referral – arbitrator’s duty – commissioner not bound by parties’ labels; must determine the true nature and substance of the dispute.
* Jurisdiction – res judicata/previous court order – where order sets a deadline subject to proof, later factual inquiries about fulfillment fall within CCMA competence.
|
28 February 2017 |
|
Reported
Appeal succeeds: exceptional circumstances (fixed‑term contract issue, onerous DRC fees/delay) warranted Labour Court hearing.
* Labour law – jurisdiction – stay of court proceedings in favour of contractual dispute resolution clauses – exceptional circumstances required to refuse arbitration; * Fixed-term employment – retrenchment for operational requirements – relevance to forum selection (Buthelezi principle); * Arbitration procedure – 30‑day referral rule, multi-stage appeals and substantial fees as potential grounds for exceptional circumstances; * Standard of appellate interference with lower court discretion to stay litigation.
|
21 February 2017 |
|
Reported
Whether an employer must hold a disciplinary hearing when repeated reasonable attempts to contact an absent employee fail.
* Employment law – Breach of contract and relief of specific performance (reinstatement) – applicability of internal Disciplinary Code – requirement for disciplinary hearing where employee absent – reasonable attempts to notify employee and dismissal for abscondment. * Procedure – motion proceedings – acceptance of respondent’s version where genuine disputes of fact cannot be resolved on affidavits. * Jurisdiction – BCEA contractual claim versus LRA unfair dismissal forum choice.
|
16 February 2017 |
| January 2017 |
|
|
Reported
Event‑triggered fixed‑term contract termination is not automatically a dismissal unless used to evade LRA protections.
Labour law – fixed‑term/eventuality contracts – automatic termination clause – proximate cause of termination – dismissal under s186(1) – s5 LRA protection against contracting out – validity depends on context and whether clause is used to evade statutory rights – jurisdictional review of arbitration awards.
|
25 January 2017 |
|
Reported
Minister’s revocation of registrar designation was administrative action, irrational and procedurally unfair; reinstatement ordered.
Administrative law — PAJA — whether revocation of statutory designation of Registrar of Labour Relations is "administrative action" — statutory source, public impact and adverse effect on incumbent — PAJA applicable; alternatively reviewable under principle of legality — failure to take into account material ministerial submission — decision irrational and procedurally unfair — reinstatement appropriate.
|
25 January 2017 |
|
Reported
Practice Manual governs archiving; archived files may be retrieved where good cause and excusable delay are shown.
* Labour Court Practice Manual – binding effect – enforces Rules and Labour Relations Act; court retains discretion
* Archiving – Practice Manual Clauses 11.2.7 and 16 – when files lapse and procedure for retrieval
* Retrieval of archived file – application under Rule 7 requires showing good cause/condonation (bona fides, full explanation, prospects of success, interest of justice)
* Delay excusable where record preparation hampered by CCMA; court must weigh cause of delay, prejudice and prospects of success
|
25 January 2017 |
|
Reported
A written settlement under s158(1)(c) read with s158(1A) was valid and the Labour Court’s order was upheld.
Labour law – Settlement agreements – s158(1)(c) of LRA – s158(1A) elaboration – distinction from s142A(1) – validity of written settlement reached during s189 consultations – effect of later retrospective s197 arbitration award – jurisdiction to make settlement an order of court.
|
20 January 2017 |
|
Reported
Failure to decide whether the employee acted dishonestly vitiated the award; gross dishonesty justified dismissal.
Labour law – misconduct and dismissal; dishonesty – submission of inflated quotation; procedural fairness – arbitrator's failure to determine primary issue; inconsistency in disciplinary treatment; sanction – gross dishonesty vitiates mitigation from long service; review – award unreasonable for omitting material determination.
|
10 January 2017 |
|
Reported
The applicant’s dismissal of the respondent for poor performance was unfair where targets were unrealistic or time to improve too short.
Labour law – dismissal for poor performance; requirement to prove fair reason and fair opportunity under Code of Good Practice; achievable performance targets; sufficiency of warnings and time to improve; appropriate sanction (reinstatement where dismissal unfair).
|
10 January 2017 |
|
Reported
An arbitrator must apply section 193(2) of the LRA before ordering reinstatement after finding dismissal unfair.
Labour law – unfair dismissal – substitution of disciplinary chairperson’s sanction by employer; arbitration awards – requirement to apply section 193(2) LRA before ordering reinstatement; review of bargaining council awards under section 145 LRA; condonation for late review; remittal for de novo arbitration where record incomplete.
|
10 January 2017 |
|
Condonation refused; dismissal for gross insubordination and negligence upheld as procedurally and substantively fair.
Labour law – condonation for late review under s145 LRA – strict scrutiny in individual dismissal cases; procedural fairness – delay in instituting disciplinary proceedings and permissibility under employer's disciplinary code; substantive fairness – gross insubordination and gross negligence; Sidumo reasonableness standard on review; attribution of union delay to employee; requirement for concrete proof of inconsistent discipline.
|
10 January 2017 |
| December 2016 |
|
|
Reported
Where parties deliberately enter a genuine consultancy contract, courts will respect that contract and not reclassify it as employment.
* Labour law – Employee v independent contractor – Characterisation of contractual relationship – effect of parties’ choice where consulting agreements are genuine. * Jurisdiction – Status as a jurisdictional fact – Labour Court may determine on record before arbitrator. * Public service – Constraints of state remuneration (PERSAL) may justify lawful consultancy arrangements. * Sham contracts – Contracts concluded in fraudem legis unenforceable only where substance forbidden by law; mere attempt to avoid labour law does not automatically void contract.
|
14 December 2016 |
|
Reported
Whether the MEIBC Main Agreement bound employees despite an exclusion, given contractual incorporation and parties' conduct.
Collective bargaining — Incorporation of central bargaining council Main Agreement into plant-level collective agreement by express clause and subsequent conduct; Validity of purported cancellation of a collective agreement; Reliance on bargaining council procedures and registrations as evidence of being bound; Employer's right to implement lay-offs and short-time under incorporated Main Agreement.
|
8 December 2016 |
| November 2016 |
|
|
Reported
Reversion to a pre-FTUR post upon loss of union office is not a demotion under the collective agreement.
Collective agreement interpretation – FTUR (full-time union representative) status and reversion on termination; scope of employer obligation under clause 5.2.6.1; demotion—meaning and application; CCMA jurisdiction to interpret agreements vs. courts deciding jurisdictional facts; benefits linked to union membership.
|
24 November 2016 |
|
Reported
Automatic termination on objectively negative vetting did not constitute dismissal and did not unlawfully oust LRA protections.
Conditional employment – automatic termination on negative vetting – whether such termination constitutes a dismissal under the LRA; Jurisdiction – referral pleads dismissal, arbitrator may determine merits; Contracting out – sections 5(2)(b) and 5(4) LRA do not invalidate resolutive conditions that do not prevent exercise of statutory rights; Procedural fairness – opportunity to make representations where employee had not provided a version.
|
22 November 2016 |
|
Arbitral award set aside for failure to notify liquidator and for joining an employer without notice.
• Labour law – s191 LRA – formal notice requirement to conciliation/arbitration; audi alteram partem
• Corporate law – liquidation of close corporation – necessity to notify/substitute liquidator
• Arbitration procedure – improper mero motu joinder and imposition of joint liability without notice
• Section 197 LRA – transferee liability requires joinder/application to join
|
8 November 2016 |
|
Reported
Overtime after 18:00 is night work; employer must ensure transport or employee may lawfully refuse to work.
Labour law; night work – definition under bargaining council agreement and BCEA; overtime extending beyond 18:00 constitutes night work; "shift" includes overtime for transport protections; employer's obligation to ensure transport available; employee may refuse night work where protective measures lacking; reviewability of arbitrator's substantive finding.
|
8 November 2016 |
| September 2016 |
|
|
Reported
Arbitrator’s dismissal for gross insubordination was within a reasonable range; Labour Court erred in substituting sanction.
Labour law – unfair dismissal – sanction – review of arbitration award – whether dismissal for gross insubordination and insolence was within band of reasonable outcomes (Sidumo standard) – Labour Court may not substitute its own view of appropriate sanction absent unreasonableness – managerial conflict of interest and lawfulness of instruction to cease representation.
|
2 September 2016 |
| August 2016 |
|
|
Reported
Employees raised a credible s187(1)(c) automatically unfair dismissal claim; absolution was wrongly granted and trial must continue.
Labour law; absolution from instance - test for sufficiency of plaintiff’s case; s187(1)(c) LRA (automatically unfair dismissal) - initial evidential burden to raise credible possibility; conditional/lock-out dismissal debate (Fry’s Metals) noted but left undecided; procedural fairness and enquiry into substance over form.
|
22 August 2016 |
| July 2016 |
|
|
Reported
An arbitrator may not substitute his own sanction assessment where an employer’s clear disciplinary code prescribes dismissal.
* Labour law – arbitration review – whether an arbitrator may substitute his own view of sanction where employer’s disciplinary policy prescribes dismissal for specified misconduct; application of Sidumo reasonableness standard. * Disciplinary procedure – till discrepancies/shortages and overs – nature of misconduct; no requirement to prove dishonesty; relevance of prior disciplinary record and documentary evidence. * Review – commissioner’s factual and legal errors may render award unreasonable and reviewable.
|
27 July 2016 |
|
Reported
Labour Court lacks jurisdiction over unfair discrimination claims not first conciliated at the CCMA; bargaining councils cannot substitute.
Employment law – Unfair discrimination disputes – Section 10 EEA requires referral to CCMA for conciliation – CCMA is exclusive conciliation forum for unfair discrimination; bargaining council has no power to conciliate under s10 – Certificate from bargaining council in unfair labour practice matter does not confer jurisdiction to adjudicate unfair discrimination claim.
|
21 July 2016 |
|
Reported
The Plastics Negotiating Forum was validly established and is the exclusive bargaining chamber for the plastics sector within the MEIBC.
* Labour law – bargaining council membership – when admission effective – conduct and administrative communications as evidence of admission.
* Collective bargaining – formation of sectoral negotiating forum under bargaining council – validity of Terms of Reference adopted by subforum and ratified by MANCO.
* Industrial action – effect of establishing an exclusive sectoral negotiating forum on protection of strikes by unions.
|
6 July 2016 |
| June 2016 |
|
|
Reported
Certified CCMA awards are enforceable without a Labour Court writ and may be stayed by the Labour Court pending review.
Labour law — enforcement of arbitration awards — s143 LRA — certified awards enforceable 'as if' Labour Court orders (no separate writ required); monetary awards executed as if Magistrate's Court orders; non-monetary awards enforced by contempt in Labour Court; Labour Court may stay enforcement pending review.
|
28 June 2016 |
|
Reported
Applicant’s failure to reconstruct an incomplete arbitration record justified dismissal of the review application with costs.
Labour law – review of arbitration award – incomplete record – materiality test depends on grounds of review, nature of missing evidence and parties’ attitude; duty to take reasonable steps to retrieve or reconstruct record; importance of serving record on commissioner; discretionary remedies include dismissal, postponement or remittal.
|
28 June 2016 |
|
Reported
Applicant’s motion failed: foreseeable factual disputes required action and BCEA damages must be proved.
* Civil procedure – motion vs action – Plascon-Evans rule – applicant must allege essential evidence; where material factual disputes are foreseeable motion is inappropriate. * Labour law – dismissal/disciplines – accepting respondent’s detailed opposing averments and supporting documents on the papers. * Remedies – BCEA breach of contract claims are civil damages claims requiring proof of causation and quantum; distinct from LRA statutory compensatory relief.
|
28 June 2016 |
|
Reported
Employees who signed membership applications remained members entitled to union representation; the appellant lacked standing to challenge membership.
* Labour law — union membership — interpretation of union constitution — membership arises on application and acceptance, not on prior payment of subscriptions.* Labour law — representation in unfair dismissal proceedings — employee's right to choose union representative (CCMA Rule 25) distinguished from union's organisational rights (ss 12–14, s200).* Administrative law/labour arbitration — review of arbitrator's legal interpretation — reasonable arbitrator should not be plainly wrong; misinterpretation can amount to reviewable irregularity.
|
28 June 2016 |
|
Reported
A commissioner must consider a bona fide explanation and the existence of a defence before refusing rescission for absence at arbitration.
* Labour law — rescission of arbitration award — good cause — need to consider both explanation for default and existence of prima facie defence — presence of witnesses indicative of bona fide intention to defend.
* Arbitration procedure — representation — commissioner’s duty to inquire and consider adjournment under s 138(5)(b)(ii) before proceeding in party's absence.
* Review — failure to deal with critical issues in reasons may vitiate exercise of discretion.
|
28 June 2016 |
|
Reported
Dismissal for handling VIP vouchers unfair where employer failed to prove existence, scope and communication of the rule.
Labour law – Misconduct and dismissal – Employer must prove existence, content, scope and communication of workplace rule alleged to be breached; mere handling of VIP vouchers by off‑duty employee insufficient to sustain dismissal; reasonableness of arbitrator's award reviewable; reinstatement appropriate remedy.
|
15 June 2016 |
|
Reported
An unsigned arbitration award served on parties is final; signature is directory and the arbitrator became functus officio; appeal dismissed.
* Labour law – arbitration awards – finality – an award served on parties passes into public domain and is final. * Labour Relations Act s138(7)(a) – signature requirement directory, not peremptory. * Doctrine of functus officio – commissioner cannot issue materially different award after issuing a final served award. * Remedies – conflict between compensation award and later reinstatement order resolved in favour of the first served award. * Condonation and reinstatement – refused where appeal lacks prospects of success.
|
15 June 2016 |
|
A co‑respondent cannot assume an applicant’s role in motion proceedings; cancellation of a non‑exclusive distribution does not trigger s197 without an actual business transfer.
Practice and procedure — motion proceedings — co‑respondent may not, while remaining a respondent, file affidavits seeking applicant’s relief; Plascon‑Evans rule applies. Labour law — s197 LRA — cancellation of a non‑exclusive distribution agreement does not trigger transfer protections absent proof of transfer of a business as a going concern; allegations of a conspiracy insufficient without clear evidence.
|
14 June 2016 |
|
Reported
Arbitrator reasonably substituted dismissal with suspension and a final warning where misconduct was lesser dishonesty.
Labour law – Unfair dismissal – Sanction – Distinguishing dishonesty from truancy/failure to work diligently – Consideration of length of service and progressive discipline – Review standard: award must fall within a reasonable range (Sidumo).
|
14 June 2016 |
|
Reported
No prospects of success: employees’ refusal to attend a compulsory wellness launch was an unprotected strike; condonation and reinstatement refused.
Labour law – refusal to attend employer wellness launch – concerted refusal to work as strike under s 213 LRA; implied duty to obey lawful and reasonable instructions; ultimatum and opportunity to reconsider; procedural fairness of disciplinary and appeal process; condonation depends on prospects of success.
|
14 June 2016 |
|
Labour Court can control its processes but cannot order repayment for sheriff-induced delict or enrichment claims.
* Labour law — Jurisdiction — Inherent and incidental powers of the Labour Court (s151(2), s158(1)(j) LRA) — Limited to matters within statutory jurisdiction. * Constitutional law — Section 173 — superior courts' power to regulate their processes; applicability to Labour Court via s151(2) LRA. * Civil procedure — Execution — sheriff’s duties, service requirements, and invalid attachment — Labour Court may stay or set aside writs but may not adjudicate distinct delict or unjustified enrichment claims arising from sheriff’s conduct. * Restitution/delict — condictio indebiti/condictio sine causa claims against recipient fall outside Labour Court jurisdiction.
|
14 June 2016 |
|
Reported
Reinstatement is the primary remedy; employer must prove impracticability with evidence, or award is reviewable.
Labour law – unfair dismissal – reinstatement is the primary remedy under s193(2) LRA – employer must prove reinstatement "not reasonably practicable" with evidence – "not reasonably practicable" means infeasibility/absence of reasonable possibility – arbitrator's reliance on irrelevant or untested considerations is gross irregularity and reviewable.
|
14 June 2016 |
|
Reported
Arbitrators pervasive intervention created a reasonable apprehension of bias; award set aside and matter remitted.
Labour arbitration — s138(1) LRA — commissioners may adopt inquisitorial/adversarial approaches but must observe natural justice; reasonable apprehension of bias — objective test (reasonable, informed person); gross irregularity and unreasonableness — s145(2)(a)(ii) and review remedial powers; remedy — set aside and remit for de novo arbitration.
|
13 June 2016 |
| May 2016 |
|
|
An OSD collective agreement read with the ministerial directive permits translation based on hospital size; arbitrator’s award upheld.
Collective agreements – OSD for nurses – interpretation of translation measures; Implementation Directive and ministerial circular must be read with agreement; translation to Assistant or Deputy Manager may depend on hospital size (90‑bed threshold); review of arbitration awards – Sidumo/Herholdt standard; role of error of law in review.
|
12 May 2016 |
|
Reported
Arbitrator's finding of unfair dismissal and entitlement to post‑termination commissions upheld; s35(4) BCEA does not cap agreed awards.
Labour law – unfair dismissal – proportionality of sanction – Sidumo reasonableness test; Evidence – exclusion of collateral post‑dismissal conduct; Statutory jurisdiction – s74(2) BCEA permits adjudication of commission claims as remuneration; Contract and practice – no retrospective forfeiture of commission without clear contractual term or established practice; Interpretation – s35(4) BCEA is a computation aid, not a cap on agreed/prudently proven awards; Costs – unsuccessful employer ordered to pay costs.
|
12 May 2016 |
|
Reported
A mining right holder remains responsible for retrenchment processes and must be included in LRA consultations despite subcontracting.
Mining law – section 52(4) MPRDA – mining right holder remains responsible for implementation of retrenchment processes under the LRA even where operations are subcontracted; interplay with s189 LRA – mining right holder must be invited to consult; exclusion renders process procedurally unfair; s200B not determined as appellants failed to prove defeat of LRA purposes.
|
11 May 2016 |
| April 2016 |
|
|
Reported
Issuing a subpoena against an opposing party without first seeking discovery under rule 6(9) can constitute an abuse of process.
Labour procedure — Discovery (rule 6(9)) v subpoena duces tecum (rule 32) — Discovery is the proper pre-trial mechanism to obtain documents from an opposing party; issuing a subpoena against a party without first seeking discovery may constitute an abuse of process.
|
20 April 2016 |
|
Whether LLF minutes and a discretionary scarce-skills policy created a binding obligation to pay allowances.
Labour law – Collective agreements and LLF minutes – Whether LLF minute and policy constituted a binding agreement to pay allowances; statutory and contractual interpretation of discretionary workplace policies; review of arbitration awards – reasonableness, certainty and competence; remittal to arbitration – limits where issue was not pleaded.
|
15 April 2016 |
|
Court held invalid municipal manager's appointment does not automatically void council decisions; Oudekraal requires case-by-case assessment.
• Mootness — court discretion to decide moot or academic labour disputes when discrete legal issues of public importance and future impact arise.
• Administrative law — effect of an invalid appointment: Oudekraal principle that unlawful administrative acts may produce legal consequences until set aside; no automatic invalidation of consequential acts.
• Municipal law — distinguishing decisions of municipal council from administrative acts of a municipal manager; factual inquiry essential to legal consequences.
• Costs — adverse costs order appropriate where respondents litigate strategically and resist correction of a legal point of public importance.
|
15 April 2016 |
| March 2016 |
|
|
Reported
Section 23(1)(d) permits binding workplace-level extension of collective agreements to non-party employees where statutory criteria are met.
Labour law – s23(1)(d) LRA – extension of collective agreements to non-party employees at workplace/centralised level; definition of "workplace" (s213) – when multiple operations form single workplace; distinction between s23 and s32 (bargaining council/sectoral extension); majoritarianism and limitation of strike rights – constitutional proportionality and ILO standards; identification and binding of non-party employees under s23(1)(d).
|
24 March 2016 |
|
Reported
Arbitrators must objectively characterise disputes; unpaid suspension is an unfair-labour-practice, not automatically a section 24 dispute.
Labour law – Section 24 LRA – disputes about interpretation or application of collective agreements; not a catch-all for breaches. Arbitrator jurisdiction – duty to objectively characterise the real dispute; labels do not determine forum. Unfair labour practice – suspension without pay constitutes unfair suspension under section 186(2)(b). Time limits – where no period is prescribed, reasonableness is a fact-specific LRA enquiry; Prescription Act not the default yardstick.
|
24 March 2016 |
| December 2015 |
|
|
An employer cannot lawfully substitute a disciplinary chair’s final sanction; such substitution is invalid and substantively unfair.
Labour law – disciplinary procedure – where collective agreement or disciplinary code vests final sanctioning power in chair, employer may not substitute sanction; substitution without lawful authority is invalid and substantively unfair; racist workplace abuse is serious but mitigation must be considered.
|
8 December 2015 |
| November 2015 |
|
|
Arrear wage claims under reinstated contracts can prescribe three years after the reinstatement order becomes executable.
* Labour law – reinstatement – effect of retrospective reinstatement on entitlement to arrear wages – distinction between judgment debt and contractual wage claims.
* Prescription Act s 11(d) – arrear wages as 'any other debt' subject to three-year prescription.
* Prescription interruption and s 15(4) – prescription runs afresh when a judgment becomes executable.
* BCEA s 77(3) – Labour Court's concurrent jurisdiction to determine contractual claims arising from reinstated employment.
* Civil procedure – Labour Court Rule 22(5) – substitution of parties; deceased employees cannot themselves apply for substitution.
|
26 November 2015 |
|
A clause compensating the respondent for forfeited deferred equity was a recruitment incentive and survived termination.
Contract interpretation – recruitment v retention incentive; deferred equity compensation; whether payment conditional on continued employment; survival of accrued contractual rights after rescission; Endumeni principles applied.
|
17 November 2015 |
|
Arbitration awards under the LRA are debts subject to a three‑year prescription; reviews do not interrupt prescription, but making an award an order of court does.
Prescription — arbitration awards under the LRA are "debts" under the Prescription Act and generally prescribe after three years; debt due on delivery of award; certification for enforcement does not delay prescription; application to make award an order of court interrupts prescription on service and must be prosecuted to final judgment; review application does not interrupt prescription; s145(9) LRA (post-1 Jan 2015) now provides interruption for later awards.
|
6 November 2015 |
| October 2015 |
|
|
Reported
Unwelcome verbal sexual advances amounted to workplace sexual harassment; dismissal was a fair sanction.
Labour law – Sexual harassment – Unwelcome verbal sexual advances outside working hours related to workplace – Single non-physical incident can constitute harassment; Codes of Good Practice and power differentials (age/gender) relevant – Sanction: dismissal may be fair where seriousness, lack of remorse and rehabilitation prospects justify it – Review: commissioner’s factual findings upheld as reasonable.
|
23 October 2015 |
