SCA considers a moot appeal for public benefit in relation to a government procurement 

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.

View Document >

Share:

More Posts

Cutting out the middle step in facilitated mass retrenchments disputes 

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.

Armed picket during protected strike does not automatically justify dismissal

The Labour Appeal Court, in Mondi South Africa v CEPPWAWU (DA25/24) [2026] ZALAC 20 (6 May 2026), upheld the reinstatement of employees dismissed for carrying weapons during a protected strike, finding that the arbitrator’s decision to impose a sanction less than dismissal fell within the range of reasonable decisions under the circumstances.

Unfair discrimination claim upheld despite differences in job titles

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.

Beyond the Text: The test for sourcing implied power

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.

Contact Us

How can we help?

Please fill in your details below and we will be in touch.