Public Newsletter


Worklaw is a subscription based labour law service developed by leading South African labour lawyers and arbitrators. Worklaw gives you all you need to manage labour law at the workplace. Go to

Worklaw subscribers receive a monthly newsletter containing commentary on the latest labour law cases and trends. This newsletter contains an article, 'Update on dismissal law', where we highlight 5 recent (mostly LAC) judgments dealing with different aspects of dismissal law. We also discuss three other new cases: The first case, a Constitutional Court decision, clarifies when the High Court has jurisdiction in labour disputes. The second case considers when a court can lift the 'corporate veil' to discover who the true employer is. The third case confirms the relationship between the Prescription Act and the LRA.

This public newsletter is a free edited version of the subscriber newsletter.


Which court? Labour Court or High Court?

In Baloyi v Public Protector & others (2021) 42 ILJ 961 (CC) the Constitutional Court pointed out that s 157(1) of the LRA did not afford the Labour Court general jurisdiction in labour matters, and that the High Court's jurisdiction was not ousted by the section just because a dispute fell within the overall sphere of employment relations. Both s 157(2) of the LRA and s 77(3) of the BCEA conferred concurrent jurisdiction on the Labour Court and the High Court in certain circumstances. This afforded a litigant an additional right to approach either court where a dispute fell within the ambit of those sections.

Read more (Worklaw subscriber access only)

Lifting the corporate veil

The 'corporate veil' is the legal screen between a company (recognised as a legal person separate from its shareholders) and the shareholders. Piercing the corporate veil or lifting the corporate veil is a legal decision to treat the rights or duties of a company as the rights or liabilities of its shareholders.

In Wilson v Prinsloo; In re: Prinsloo v Expidor 163 CC t/a The League of Gentleman and Another (CA12/19) [2021] ZALAC 10 (31 May 2021) the essence of the appeal was whether it was appropriate, on the facts before the court, to lift the corporate veil.

Read more (Worklaw subscriber access only)

Is the Prescription Act inconsistent with the LRA?

In National Union of Mineworkers on behalf of Majebe v Civil & General Contractors CC (2021) 42 ILJ 1027 (LAC) the court considered the various conflicting LAC and Constitutional Court judgments on the issue and confirmed that the Constitutional Court's decision in Food & Allied Workers Union on behalf of Gaoshubelwe v Pieman's Pantry (Pty) Ltd (Case No CCT 236/16, 20 March 2018) had since clarified the position that the Prescription Act is not inconsistent with the provisions of the LRA and that claims under the LRA do prescribe.

Read more (Worklaw subscriber access only)

ARTICLE: Update on dismissal law

By Prof Alan Rycroft

There have been several significant judgments in the last few months, largely from the LAC, on different aspects of dismissal law. Instead of the usual article on a single theme, Alan Rycroft in this article highlights a variety of issues affecting the law on dismissal, including the following: Read more (Worklaw subscriber access only)


Worklaw is an online labour law advice and information subscription service - see Worklaw subscribers can obtain advice from experienced arbitrators, research the law and leading cases, receive weekly and monthly news updates, attend Worklaw's annual labour law updates, and access excellent training material, model procedures and checklists, to name a few of these services.

Contact for more information.

Bruce Robertson
June 2021
Copyright: Worklaw