Legal updates and opinions
News / News
Temporary Employment Service – Judgement
On 26 July 2018, the Constitutional Court upheld the decision of the Labour Appeal Court in National Union of Metalworkers of SA v Assign Services & others. In so doing, section 198A(3)(b) of the Labour Relations Act (“LRA”) was confirmed to mean that employees, earning below the prescribed earnings threshold of R205,433.30 per annum, who are placed with a client by a temporary employment service (“TES”) for a period exceeding three months are solely employed by the client, and the TES is no longer the employer of that employee.
The effect of the judgment is that the TES client becomes responsible for all the obligations of an employer with regards to the TES employee.
If you would like to learn more about Labour & Employment please visit our practice area page.
Latest News
The downside to a side hustle – moonlighting, conflicts of interest and the law
and Nombulelo Bashe – Candidate Attorney Employees are required to devote their time, effort and skills to advance their employer's business [...]
Mystery of the momentary visitor: Solving the uncertainty surrounding the replacement of an interim business rescue practitioner
A company can be placed in business rescue in only two ways, voluntarily by a board resolution in terms of [...]
International: Trends in AI governance
READ - INTERNATIONAL: TRENDS IN AI GOVERNANCE We're thrilled to share an insightful article featured in OneTrust DataGuidance on the [...]
A minute before midnight, focus required! Deadline is 22 January 2024
and Chiara Ferri - Candidate Attorney The Media and Digital Platforms Market Inquiry ("the Inquiry"), which launched in October 2023, [...]
Making the dies count
and Nombulelo Bashe - Candidate Attorney On 21 April 2023 the Governing Body of the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and [...]
Creditors now empowered to make application to declare directors delinquent
and Khanyisa Tshoba - Candidate Attorney A critical look at Vantage Mezzanine Fund II Partnership and Another v Hopeson and [...]