RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN S.A. EMPLOYMENT LAW

Date of Judgment & Seat of Court: 5 November 2026, Labour Court, Cape Town Case No: C363/2024 Name of Judge(s): Lagrange J Summary of Factual Matrix: Mr Douse, a Senior Superintendent in the municipality's Parks Division with service since 2005, had not taken up his redesignated placement at Bergoord despite instructions from the Municipal Manager. On 3 May 2023 the Municipal Manager excluded him from a departmental meeting and instructed him to return to his workstation; Douse instead entered the office afterwards and confronted the Municipal Manager, invoking a former municipal manager who had been dismissed and warning him that he would see what would happen to him. Douse then lodged a grievance alleging that the Municipal Manager had assaulted him by pushing him. He was charged with dishonesty, intimidation and gross insubordination, and was dismissed. The SALGBC arbitrator found the dismissal substantively and procedurally fair, holding that there had at most been a gen...

Date of Judgment & Seat of Court: 30 October 2026, Labour Court, Gqeberha (Port Elizabeth) Case No: PR237/23 Name of Judge(s): Kroon AJ Summary of Factual Matrix: The applicant municipality, in severe financial distress and subject to national intervention under section 139 of the Constitution, applied to the South African Local Government Bargaining Council for a partial exemption from clauses 6.6 and 6.7 of the three-year Salary and Wage Collective Agreement, so as to avoid paying the 5.4% across-the-board increase due in the third year. It attributed its predicament to historical maladministration, including an allegedly incorrect categorisation and grading of the municipality that inflated its payroll, and relied on the replacement of its council and management. The panellist refused the exemption and, in paragraph 78 of her ruling, further ordered the municipality to review and adjust its budget so as to prioritise the increases. The municipality sought to review and set as...

Date of Judgment & Seat of Court: 25 August 2026, Labour Appeal Court Case No: A2026/085560 Name of Judge(s): Van Niekerk JA (Nkutha-Nkontwana JA and Moshoana AJA concurring) Summary of Factual Matrix: The first appellant, a sales executive employed by the respondent in the heavy commercial vehicle repair industry, had given restraint, non-solicitation and confidentiality undertakings, the restraint operating for 24 months after termination and clause 9.4 deeming the restraint period extended for the duration of any breach. She resigned, assuring the respondent that she would not compete with it, and on 1 July 2025 joined the second appellant, a direct competitor; shortly before resigning she had emailed customer lists to her personal address. The Labour Court enforced the undertakings, restraining her for twelve months calculated from the date of its order (3 November 2025), and ordered both appellants to pay costs; the costs order against the second appellant was later abandon...

Date of Judgment & Seat of Court: 30 October 2026, Labour Court, Cape Town Case No: C21/2025 Name of Judge(s): Lagrange J Summary of Factual Matrix: The plaintiff, an attorney formerly employed in the defendant law firm's commercial property department, resigned with effect from 31 July 2024, alleging victimisation, bullying and racial harassment by a director and the firm's failure to protect her. She referred a constructive dismissal dispute under section 191 of the LRA to the CCMA, without marking the box for an unfair discrimination dispute under section 10 of the EEA; conciliation failed and the certificate of outcome described the dispute as a constructive dismissal. She then requested arbitration, and later, citing the CCMA's backlog, instituted action in the Labour Court claiming compensation and damages of about R5,7 million under section 50(2) of the EEA for unfair discrimination in the form of racial harassment. The firm raised two special pleas: principal...

Date of Judgment & Seat of Court: 23 October 2026, Labour Court, Johannesburg Case No: JR2334/23 Name of Judge(s): Motshekga AJ Summary of Factual Matrix: Ms Mogano, a multi-skilled employee at Ster-Kinekor's cinema in Rosebank since 2014 whose duties included preparing popcorn, was dismissed in July 2023 for misappropriation of company assets, dishonesty and failure to adhere to company policy, the employer alleging that the complex manager had found her eating popcorn in the kitchen. Her version was that she had put a few kernels in her mouth to check the level of salt, as the manager had told her to do after a customer complained in 2022 that the popcorn was too salty. The CCMA commissioner preferred her version, found that neither dishonesty nor a rule prohibiting tasting (or her knowledge of one) had been proved, held the dismissal substantively unfair and ordered retrospective reinstatement. Ster-Kinekor applied, one day late, to review the award, contending that the c...

Seat of Court: Labour Court, Johannesburg Date Delivered: 23 October 2026 Case No: 2026/214432 Name of Judge(s): Ramji AJ Factual Summary: NUMSA, acting on behalf of Dr Seopela, brought an urgent application against Denel Soc Ltd concerning disciplinary proceedings against the employee, after a referral to the CCMA under section 188A(11) of the LRA which the CCMA had set down for hearing. On 15 September 2026 the Court granted an order, including a declarator, on the footing that, as it interpreted IDC v Modika, the CCMA's setting down of a section 188A(11) referral constitutes the decision that suspends the disciplinary proceedings. NUMSA had sought relief based on changed circumstances by way of a supplementary affidavit without amending its notice of motion. Reasons were delivered on 18 September 2026. Denel applied for leave to appeal on some eight grounds, including the Court's interpretation of IDC, the grant of relief not sought in the notice of motion, urgency, the ...

Date of Judgment & Seat of Court: 23 October 2026, Labour Court, Johannesburg Case No: 2026/241333 Name of Judge(s): Snyman AJ Summary of Factual Matrix: The applicant, an Eskom employee and the Regional Chairperson of the Highveld Region of the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM), had his office-bearer benefits, including a car allowance, terminated in March 2026 after a Facebook comment praising a rival union, and was expelled from NUM on 30 April 2026. Legally assisted throughout, he challenged the expulsion in the High Court by way of an application in the ordinary course, launched on 29 May 2026. After NUM's attorneys pointed out in September 2026 that the dispute fell within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Labour Court under section 158(1)(e) of the LRA, he withdrew that application. On 30 September 2026 he brought an identical application in the Labour Court, this time as an urgent application, seeking final declaratory relief that his expulsion and removal from off...

Date of Judgment & Seat of Court: 23 October 2026, Labour Court, Johannesburg Case No: 2026/249228 Name of Judge(s): Snyman AJ Summary of Factual Matrix: The South African Post Office (SAPO) has been in business rescue since July 2023. Six employees dismissed for misconduct in December 2025 referred an unfair dismissal dispute to the CCMA without obtaining the consent of the business rescue practitioners or the leave of the High Court under section 133(1) of the Companies Act, and without joining the practitioners. SAPO objected in limine that the moratorium deprived the CCMA of jurisdiction and that the practitioners had not been joined. The commissioner dismissed the objection, relying on a purported Constitutional Court judgment, cited as [2023] ZACC 40, which does not exist, and the arbitration was set down for 15 October 2026. After an abortive rescission application in the CCMA, SAPO and its practitioners brought a review application under section 158(1)(g) of the LRA and ...