objective test Archives

Profit-sharing agreement: Contractual binding force?

by GilesFiles | Mar 18, 2026 | 2020 onwards, Causes and defences, Costs, Costs awarded, Courts, Declaratory, Evidence & onus, General, High Court, High Court judges, Interpretation etc, Judges, Legal Practice, Legislation, Orders, Parties, Personal services, Private enterprises, Refused, Sectors, Topics | 0 |

For subscribers only Whilst some judgment summaries are available to all, this judgment summary is reserved for subscribers only. If you are already a subscriber, you can login to see this judgment summary. If you cannot login,...

Anticipated or future intolerability: Constructive dismissal?

by GilesFiles | Feb 24, 2026 | 2020 onwards, Appeals, Appeals - leave, Bill of Rights, Causes and defences, ConCourt judges, Constitutional Court, Constructive: 186(1)(e), Costs, Costs not awarded, Courts, Declaratory, Disallowed, Discrimination (LRL 11), Interpretation etc, Intolerable, Judges, Jurisdiction & powers, Labour Relations, Legal Practice, Legality principle, Legislation, LRA 08a: 185-197B Dismissal, LRA 197 - transfers, LRA 1995, M Madlanga, Orders, Parties, Personal services, Private enterprises, Resignations, Resolving disputes (LRL 3), Review tests, Sectors, Statutes (LRL 2)-work, Statutory, Topics | 0 |

For subscribers only Whilst some judgment summaries are available to all, this judgment summary is reserved for subscribers only. If you are already a subscriber, you can login to see this judgment summary. If you cannot login,...

Anticipated or future intolerability: Dissenting judgment

by GilesFiles | Feb 24, 2026 | 2020 onwards, Appeals, Appeals - leave, Bill of Rights, Causes and defences, ConCourt judges, Constitutional Court, Constructive: 186(1)(e), Costs, Costs not awarded, Courts, Declaratory, Disallowed, Discrimination (LRL 11), Interpretation etc, Intolerable, Judges, Jurisdiction & powers, Labour Relations, Legal Practice, Legality principle, Legislation, LRA 08a: 185-197B Dismissal, LRA 197 - transfers, LRA 1995, M Madlanga, Orders, Parties, Personal services, Private enterprises, Resignations, Resolving disputes (LRL 3), Review tests, Sectors, Statutes (LRL 2)-work, Statutory, Topics | 0 |

For subscribers only Whilst some judgment summaries are available to all, this judgment summary is reserved for subscribers only. If you are already a subscriber, you can login to see this judgment summary. If you cannot login,...

Harassment and bullying discussed: Subjective test?

by GilesFiles | May 25, 2022 | 2020 onwards, Appeals, Appeals - leave, Bill of Rights, Causes and defences, Conduct - gross, Conduct & capacity, Costs, Courts, Disallowed, Evidence & onus, Harass & bully, High Court, High Court judges, Interpretation etc, Judges, Legal Practice, Legislation, Orders, Parties, Private enterprises, Rules Codes & Manual, Sectors, Statutory, Termination (LRL 8), Topics, Trust & confidence | 0 |

For subscribers only Whilst some judgment summaries are available to all, this judgment summary is reserved for subscribers only. If you are already a subscriber, you can login to see this judgment summary. If you cannot login,...

Wrongful defamatory statements: Impugning employee dignity

by GilesFiles | Apr 13, 2022 | 2020 onwards, Applications, Bill of Rights, Causes and defences, Costs, Costs awarded, Courts, Damages, Declaratory, Delict, Dignity equality freedom, Evidence & onus, Exceptions/special pleas, High Court, High Court judges, Insights, Interpretation etc, Judges, Jurisdiction & powers, Legal Practice, Logistics, Orders, Parties, Sectors, Special pleas, State Owned Enterprises, Suspensions, Topics, Transport & communication, Unlawful and void | 0 |

NPM v Prasa When are statements concerning employee conduct or performance made internally or externally by senior management wrongful and defamatory? “[50] The ordinary meaning of the words and the structure of the...

Condonation flexible discretion: Objective test required

by GilesFiles | Jan 10, 2017 | 2017, 2017, Condonation, Courts, Landmark judgments, Supreme Court of Appeal, Words & phrases | 0 |

Condonation flexible discretion: In 1962 the then highest court wrestled with when to condone court applications that were filed late or did not comply with the rules. One of giants of the court, Holmes JA, formulated an...

Impugning human dignity: Test subjective objective

by GilesFiles | Mar 28, 2007 | 2014 and earlier, Appeals, Appeals - leave, Bill of Rights, Causes and defences, Courts, Delict, Dignity equality freedom, Disallowed, Exceptions/special pleas, Interpretation etc, Judges, Jurisdiction & powers, Legal Practice, Orders, Parties, Retired judges, Roman Dutch law, SCA judges, Special pleas, Supreme Court of Appeal, Topics, Universities and schools | 0 |

Dendy v University of the Witwatersrand SCA in considering the issue of impugning human dignity confirmed that the legal position as laid down by the SCA in Delange v Costa was consistent with the Constitution and did not need...

Tag: objective test

Profit-sharing agreement: Contractual binding force?

Anticipated or future intolerability: Constructive dismissal?

Anticipated or future intolerability: Dissenting judgment

Harassment and bullying discussed: Subjective test?

Wrongful defamatory statements: Impugning employee dignity

Condonation flexible discretion: Objective test required

Impugning human dignity: Test subjective objective