The Limitations of Legal Professional Privilege in Mine Health and Safety Inquiries

On 28 November 2025, the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) handed down judgment in Mafoko Security Patrols (Pty) Ltd and Others v Mjayeli Security (Pty) Ltd and Others. The judgment clarified the nature of the remedial discretion enjoyed by the Court under section 172(1)(b) of the Constitution, and the import of the judgment of the Constitutional Court in Allpay II.

Nicholas “Fink” Haysom was foundational to establishing Cheadle Thompson & Haysom (CTH), together with Halton Cheadle and Clive Thompson.

Section 217 of the Constitution sets the parameters within which organs of state must procure goods and services. The Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act (“PPPFA”) and the Preferential Procurement Regulations give practical effect to these parameters. The legal framework seeks to balance fairness and competitiveness with the state’s obligation to procure goods and services efficiently and responsibly. The Supreme Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Urban Icon (Pty) Ltd v South African National Roads Agency SOC Ltd highlights the complexities of this task.

On 11 August 2025, the Labour Appeal Court (LAC) in CEPPWAWU obo Tabata v Aspen Pharmacare Ltd (PA17/2024) [2025] ZALAC 43 (24 July 2025) determined, among other things, whether security furnished in terms of sections 145(7) and (8) of the Labour Relations Act (LRA) continues to have the effect of staying the enforcement of an arbitration award in circumstances where a review application has been archived under the (now repealed) Practice Manual.