Posts

Labour Association Workers Union obo February & others v APL Cartons (Pty) Ltd & others (Application for Leave to Appeal) [2026] ZALCCT 180

By
Seat of Court: Labour Court, Cape Town Date Delivered: 13 October 2026 Case No: 2025/084497 Name of Judge(s): De Kock AJ Factual Summary: LAWU referred a dispute to the CCMA on behalf of former employees of APL Cartons concerning the payment to them of retirement-fund contributions which Sanlam had paid to the employer as sole beneficiary after the fund was terminated. The commissioner declined jurisdiction on three independent grounds: LAWU had not established its authority to represent the individuals or their membership; the same dispute had been resolved by its withdrawal in November 2021; and the claim did not fall within section 73A of the BCEA. LAWU’s review of that ruling was deemed withdrawn under rule 37(15), and on 7 September 2026 the Court dismissed its application to reinstate the review for want of prospects of success, ordering it to pay costs on scale B. LAWU sought leave to appeal on seven grounds, concerning the withdrawal, section 73A, mandate and membership, th...
Post a Comment
Read more

National Student Financial Aid Scheme v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration & others (Leave to Appeal) [2026] ZALCCT 179

By
Seat of Court: Labour Court, Cape Town Date Delivered: 13 October 2026 Case No: 2025/087146 Name of Judge(s): De Kock AJ Factual Summary: The third respondent, an employee of NSFAS with some seventeen years’ service and a clean record, was dismissed for blind-copying confidential work emails, including a trial balance and a payroll schedule, to her personal email account in breach of the Information Security Policy. The commissioner classified the misconduct under item 40 of the disciplinary code (which prescribes a final written warning) rather than item 15 (which prescribes dismissal), reasoning that ‘disclosure’ required transmission to a third party and that harm had to be probable, and found the dismissal unfair. On 7 September 2026 this Court reviewed and set aside the award for a material misconception of the enquiry and remitted the dispute for arbitration afresh. The employee applied, in chambers, for leave to appeal on six grounds: the construction of ‘disclosure’ under i...
Post a Comment
Read more

Nelesco 318 (Pty) Ltd v AMCU obo Kehologile & others [2026] ZALCCT 178

By
Date of Judgment & Seat of Court: 12 October 2026, Labour Court, Cape Town Case No: C71/2022 Name of Judge(s): May AJ Summary of Factual Matrix: The employee, a tyre-wheel dozer operator represented by AMCU, was dismissed for refusing to obey instructions (to undergo training on a track dozer and to change shifts), loafing and poor performance, having previously received two final written warnings. He contended that a lower-back condition prevented him from operating the track dozer and that a shift change would cause him transport difficulties. The CCMA commissioner found the dismissal substantively unfair: the employer had not produced medical evidence that he was fit to operate the track dozer, its witness had conceded that an employee may refuse an unsafe instruction, and no evidence of loafing or poor performance had been led. The employer applied under section 145 of the LRA to review the award, alleging errors of fact and law rendering it unreasonable. The timing of the r...
Post a Comment
Read more

Bester v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration & others [2026] ZALCCT 177

By
Date of Judgment & Seat of Court: 12 October 2026, Labour Court, Cape Town Case No: C347/24 Name of Judge(s): May AJ Summary of Factual Matrix: The applicant, the head farm manager of the third respondent, Quantum Foods, was dismissed for the unauthorised removal of company property after he put 40 litres of the farm’s diesel into his private vehicle. He contended that he had used the vehicle for business travel, that the previous owner of the farm had authorised the practice, and that he was unaware of any rule requiring prior permission or of the travel-reimbursement policy. The arbitrator found that a reasonable rule requiring authorisation existed and was known to the applicant (who had himself previously dismissed an employee for similar conduct), that the reimbursement policy was known to him, that the claimed business travel and its necessity had not been proved, and that the misconduct involved dishonesty warranting dismissal. The applicant applied under section 145 of t...
Post a Comment
Read more

Department of Agriculture, Land Reform, and Rural Development v Makhubele & others [2026] ZALCJHB 371

By
Date of Judgment & Seat of Court: 9 October 2026, Labour Court, Johannesburg Case No: 2025/050424 Name of Judge(s): Mogane AJ Summary of Factual Matrix: The third respondent, a project officer in the Land Acquisition unit of the applicant department since 2008, faced five charges of gross negligence and financial misconduct under the Public Finance Management Act and the Public Service Regulations, arising from the allocation in 2013 of a state farm to the Masango brothers, who allegedly did not qualify, and from the failure to collect rental from them between 2013 and 2019. The chairperson of the internal disciplinary enquiry, the first respondent, found him not guilty on all five charges. The department applied under section 158(1)(h) of the LRA to review and set aside that outcome, contending that the chairperson had applied the criminal standard of proof, ignored material evidence, wrongly accepted the employee’s version and reached a conclusion no reasonable chairperson cou...
Post a Comment
Read more

POPCRU obo Kekana v South African Police Service & others [2026] ZALCJHB 375

By
Date of Judgment & Seat of Court: 8 October 2026, Labour Court, Johannesburg Case No: JR2627/21 Name of Judge(s): Whittington AJ Summary of Factual Matrix: The employee, a police officer and full-time POPCRU shop steward, addressed mourners at a funeral on 28 July 2019 as a COSATU representative, invoking his status as a police officer and identifying alleged suspects in an ongoing investigation. He was charged under the SAPS disciplinary regulations with conduct bringing the service into disrepute and was dismissed on 10 March 2020. The bargaining council arbitrator, the third respondent, found the dismissal fair in an award of 9 June 2021, holding that the trade-union protections in clauses 10.2 and 10.3 of the collective agreement did not extend to such misconduct. The review application under section 145 of the LRA was filed on 3 December 2021, some four months and twelve days late. The employee sought condonation, attributing the delay to ignorance of the right of review an...
Post a Comment
Read more

Blue Falcon 188 Trading (Pty) Ltd t/a Studio 88 v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration & others (Leave to Appeal) [2026] ZALCJHB 374

By
Seat of Court: Labour Court, Johannesburg Date Delivered: 8 October 2026 Case No: JR429/23 Name of Judge(s): Heideman AJ Factual Summary: The third respondent, a salesperson employed by the applicant retailer, was dismissed for gross negligence after overcharging a customer while operating a till on which she had not been trained, but which her line manager had asked her to operate in his absence. The commissioner found her conduct to be negligent rather than grossly negligent, held the dismissal substantively unfair and ordered reinstatement with four months’ back pay. On 30 July 2026 the Court dismissed the employer’s review application, confirmed the award and updated the back-pay calculation. The employer sought leave to appeal on eight grounds: six attacking the Court’s findings on authorisation to use the till, onus, the degree of negligence, the misconduct charged, lack of training and the consistency of the employee’s version; a seventh alleging that the Court had failed to...
Post a Comment
Read more

East Rand Plastics (Pty) Ltd v National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa obo Matola & others [2026] ZALCJHB 378

By
Date of Judgment & Seat of Court: 7 October 2026, Labour Court, Johannesburg Case No: JR1907/22 Name of Judge(s): Whittington AJ Summary of Factual Matrix: The employee, a quality inspector at a manufacturer of plastic products, was dismissed in April 2021 for fraud, namely falsifying quality-control records and failing to perform quality checks, after a defect was discovered in bags produced for an important customer. The employer relied principally on a manager’s analysis of CCTV footage of his shift, which indicated that prescribed inspections, in particular the drawstring test, had not been performed in accordance with the standard operating procedure although the control sheets recorded full compliance. The bargaining council commissioner found the dismissal substantively unfair, reasoning that the employee had been inadequately trained, that no fraudulent intent had been shown and that the evidence was inconclusive. The employer applied under section 145 of the LRA to revi...
Post a Comment
Read more

Association of Mineworkers and Construction Workers Union obo Maluleke v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration & others [2026] ZALCJHB 377

By
Date of Judgment & Seat of Court: 7 October 2026, Labour Court, Johannesburg Case No: JR2130/23 Name of Judge(s): Whittington AJ Summary of Factual Matrix: The employee, an administrative assistant with some fourteen years’ service and a clean disciplinary record at Glencore Eastern Chrome Mines, was responsible for updating a transport vendor’s letter of good standing on the mine’s access-control systems. Although he knew that the vendor’s access would expire on 6 January 2023, he went on bereavement leave following the death of the grandfather who had raised him without updating the system or handing the task over. The vendor’s trucks were denied access for almost seven hours until another employee intervened. He was dismissed for gross negligence, while his supervisor, who had granted leave without enquiring about outstanding work, was counselled. The commissioner upheld the dismissal as substantively fair. On review under section 145 of the LRA, the union contended that the ...
Post a Comment
Read more

SAMU obo Van Staden v Rand Water Soc Ltd & others [2026] ZALCD 54

By
Date of Judgment & Seat of Court: 7 October 2026, Labour Court, Durban Case No: D97/2024 Name of Judge(s): Whitcher J Summary of Factual Matrix: The employee, an electrician with Rand Water since 2006 represented by SAMU, was dismissed in April 2023 on charges including the unauthorised removal, on 7 December 2020, of a water pump from the Meredale reservoir which he never returned. The employer relied on entries in the site security occurrence book recording that he had taken the pump, saying that he would fix it, together with vehicle-tracker data placing him on site, the foreman’s email of 4 December 2020 reporting only a missing cable, and the discovery in June 2021 that the pump was missing. The employee’s version was that he had found the pump missing in November 2020 and reported it, and that he had visited the site on 7 December 2020 only to measure for a replacement cable. The CCMA commissioner found the dismissal substantively and procedurally fair. On review under sec...
Post a Comment
Read more