RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN S.A. EMPLOYMENT LAW

Date of Judgment & Seat of Court: 8 April 2026; Labour Court of South Africa, Johannesburg Name of Judge(s): Makhura J Summary of Factual Matrix:  On 26 November 2025, the Court dismissed with costs the applicant's application to review and set aside an arbitration award issued by the second respondent on 30 October 2019. In that award, the second respondent concluded that the dismissal of the individual applicant was both substantively and procedurally fair. The applicant subsequently filed an application for leave to appeal against that judgment and order. Summary of Findings: "[3] I have considered the application for leave to appeal, together with the grounds advanced by the applicant as further developed in the written submissions. I have also had regard to the applicable statutory test for the grant of leave to appeal contained in section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act and am satisfied that the application meets the requisite threshold." As such, the Court c...

Date of Judgment & Seat of Court: 20 April 2026; Labour Court of South Africa, Johannesburg Name of Judge(s): Daniels J Summary of Factual Matrix:  The third respondent was appointed as section engineer on 1 August 2018. In late March 2021, he was charged with misconduct: (i) conduct unbecoming for appointing a supplier (Fikra) that did not meet safety requirements; (ii) acting against company regulations by not following procurement policy; (iii) gross negligence for taking suppliers underground without induction/training; and (iv) corrupt/fraudulent practices for appointing incompetent suppliers who performed substandard work at inflated rates.  The applicant's case was that the third respondent motivated for Fikra's appointment, indicating compliance with safety directives, but Fikra charged significantly more than the existing supplier (Premier), performed substandard work requiring re-doing, and lacked a safety file. The third respondent testified he sought savings t...

Date of Judgment & Seat of Court: 13 April 2026; Labour Court of South Africa, Cape Town Name of Judge(s): Lagrange J Summary of Factual Matrix:  The applicant was employed as a team leader in the employer's farming operation. He was dismissed after being found guilty of three charges: (a) inciting fellow employees to approach management for salary increases; (b) gross negligence relating to health and safety, concerning an injury to an employee sitting on a trailer being towed by a tractor he was driving; and (c) acting in breach of COVID Level 5 lockdown regulations by visiting a clinic 35km away for a routine follow-up consultation, contrary to instructions limiting clinic visits to emergencies.  The arbitrator dismissed the incitement charge but upheld the remaining two, finding the dismissal substantively and procedurally fair. The applicant, representing himself, sought review on grounds including alleged delay in disciplinary action, failure to consider harvest-time...

Date of Judgment & Seat of Court: 13 April 2026; Labour Court of South Africa, Johannesburg Name of Judge(s): Lewis AJ Summary of Factual Matrix:  Professor Ravinder was employed as a Professor at the Graduate School of Business and Government Leadership from 1 October 2016 until dismissal on 4 August 2021. Between December 2019 and February 2020, he attended 22 conferences in India and submitted reimbursement claims for hotel accommodation for five conferences. He was charged with misconduct: "Any act or behaviour which has an element of dishonesty and/or misappropriation... in that you are alleged to have submitted reimbursement claims for hotel accommodation... the said claims are believed to be a misrepresentation or fraudulent claims".  Following disciplinary proceedings, he was found guilty and dismissed. The arbitrator found the dismissal substantively fair. Professor Ravinder sought review. Summary of Findings: "[11] The test to be applied under section 14...

Date of Judgment & Seat of Court: 8 April 2026; Labour Court of South Africa, Johannesburg Name of Judge(s): Steenkamp AJ Summary of Factual Matrix:  The applicant was employed by the Presidential Protection Services (PPS) of SAPS, stationed in Durban. Following tension with Lieutenant Colonel Ngcobo and reciprocal complaints, an internal investigation recommended the applicant's re-deployment as an interim measure.  On 21 January 2025, she was permanently re-deployed to the Information Management Centre. The applicant acknowledged receipt on 29 January 2025 but allegedly continued attending at her original post.  On 28 May 2025, she was charged with failing to comply with the re-deployment instruction. Her salary was stopped on 30 August 2025; she became aware on 9 September 2025. She ceased reporting for duty on 10 September 2025, alleging lack of financial means. Letters of demand were issued in October 2025 and February 2026.  This urgent application was laun...

Date of Judgment & Seat of Court: 17 April 2026; Labour Court of South Africa, Johannesburg Name of Judge(s): Tshisevhe AJ Summary of Factual Matrix:  The applicant was employed as a Lecturer by the First Respondent from 1 August 2013. On 10 October 2021, the Head of Department allocated the module General Principles of Criminal Law (CJUA021) to both the applicant and himself as co-lecturers.  The applicant queried what aspects the HOD would lecture, and was advised the HOD would only intervene when necessary and contribute to assessments, with the applicant remaining primary facilitator.  The applicant reported concerns to the Director and Dean. When asked to provide assessment papers on 16 March 2021, the applicant indicated he would not participate in module activities as he had escalated his grievance.  He was subsequently charged with insubordination and neglect of duties, found guilty, and suspended without pay for three months plus a final written warnin...

Date of Judgment & Seat of Court: 15 April 2026; Labour Court of South Africa, Cape Town Name of Judge(s): Lagrange J Summary of Factual Matrix:  The applicant was employed by the Third Respondent as a Central Processing Operator at Red Cross Hospital since 2015. He was found guilty of five charges of misconduct: (1) absence without permission from 17 September to 15 October 2021; (2) failure to submit a medical certificate within reasonable time; (3) derogatory and disrespectful email to supervisor on 10 August 2021; (4) further failure to carry out orders and disrespectful email on 7 December 2021; and (5) leaving the workplace on 4 February 2022 contrary to instruction.  The disciplinary hearing proceeded in his absence after multiple postponements. He was dismissed and his internal appeal failed.  The arbitrator found the dismissal both procedurally and substantively fair. The applicant sought review, alleging inter alia that the arbitrator erred in finding cert...

Date of Judgment & Seat of Court: 8 April 2026; Labour Court of South Africa, Johannesburg Name of Judge(s): Buirski AJ Summary of Factual Matrix:  The applicant made an application for leave to appeal in terms of Rule 67 of the Labour Court Rules against the judgment and order handed down on 30 December 2025.  The application was considered in chambers. Summary of Findings: "[2] I don't consider it necessary to provide reasons for my decision, save to state that I have considered the application for leave to appeal and that I am of the opinion that this application evinces neither a reasonable prospect of success nor any other compelling reason why an appeal should be heard." As such, the Court considered the application for leave to appeal and found it evinced neither a reasonable prospect of success nor any compelling reason why an appeal should be heard, applying the test under section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act. Order: "1. The application for leave ...

Date of Judgment & Seat of Court: 8 April 2026; Labour Court of South Africa, Cape Town Name of Judge(s): Lagrange J Summary of Factual Matrix: The plaintiff was employed by Pioneer Fishing as Human Resources Manager from March 2015. From approximately 2020, she reported on a 'dotted-line' basis to Mr Pieter Greeff, an independent contractor appointed as Group COO.  During 2020, they engaged in a consensual romantic relationship which ended on 19 April 2022, initiated by Greeff. Subsequently, a contemplated formalisation of a Group HR Manager role (for which Greeff had expressed strong support on 1 May 2022) was placed on hold on 19 May 2022.  The plaintiff alleged Greeff's conduct became hostile thereafter. She lodged grievances and reported his conduct to the Group CEO. In February 2023, following a meeting between the plaintiff and Greeff, adverse employee statements were obtained, an independent investigation was conducted, and disciplinary proceedings were instit...