Armed picket during protected strike does not automatically justify dismissal

On 28 November 2025, the Supreme Court of Appeal (“SCA”) handed down judgment in Tekoa Consulting Engineers (Pty) Ltd v Alfred Nzo District Municipality [2025] ZASCA 180, declaring tender documents unlawful for vagueness, despite the work already having been completed.

On 29 May 2026, the Constitutional Court in NUMSA and Others v Industrial Oleo Chemical Products [2026] ZACC [22] clarified that, in a facilitated largescale retrenchment, it is not necessary to first refer a dispute to conciliation before approaching the Labour Court to challenge the substantive fairness of the dismissal. The judgment brings certainty in relation to section 189A(7) of the Labour Relations Act (“LRA”), following a line of conflicting judgments in the Labour and Labour Appeal Courts.

The Labour Court, in Southern African Clothing and Textile Workers’ Union v Alpha Pharm (Pty) Ltd, considered whether black employees who perform similar work to their white counterparts, but earn significantly less, were unfairly discriminated against on the basis of race. The case focused on whether differences in job titles and historical employment arrangements justify pay disparities. CTH acted for the trade union and its members.

On 23 January 2026, the Constitutional Court handed down judgment in Director of Public Prosecutions, Johannesburg v Schutlz; Director of Public Prosecutions, Bloemfontein v Cholota. The constitutional question which seized the Court was whether the power to authorise outgoing extradition requests lies with the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) or the National Executive.