Article 12/2024

What is the viewpoint of the labour appeal court, as expressed in SA Municipal Workers’ Union obo Morwe v Tswaing Local Municipality and Another [2023] 2 BLLR 131 (LAC); (2022) 33 SALLR 60 (LAC) as to the question as to whether or not the labour court only has jurisdiction during the existence of a contract of employment and not once it has been terminated?


The labour appeal court, in the aforesaid judgment, adopted the following approach:

  • s77(3) of the BCEA confers on the labour court concurrent jurisdiction with civil courts
  • the limitation exists in respect of matters concerning a contract of employment
  • whatever a civil court can hear ‘concerning a contract of employment’ is what the labour court can hear, and this is not limited to contracts which are in existence and have not been terminated
  • thus, a dispute concerning a contract of employment covers disputes whether the contract has been validly cancelled or has been breached

On what basis will a client of a labour broker be held vicariously liable for the injuries suffered by an employee employed by a labour broker when such employee performs functions at the client’s workplace?

Is an employer vicariously liable where its employee is sexually harassed by a superior employee?

It is well-established that an employer is vicariously liable (faultlessly liable) for the wrong committed by an employee during the course/scope/sphere of employment (Feldman v Mall 1945 AD 733).