PTAWU obo Xoloani and Others v Mhoko’s Waste & Security Services

Fifty‑one employees, represented by PTAWU, were found by a CCMA commissioner on 29 April 2012 to have been unfairly dismissed. An arbitration award ordered their reinstatement with retrospective effect and limited back pay. The award was certified under section 143(3) of the Labour Relations Act (LRA) on 8 May 2014. The employer did not pursue a review application but also did not reinstate the employees. A first contempt application launched in March 2015 was dismissed in October 2016 due to defective service. A second contempt application was launched on 17 August 2017. In response, the employer raised a special plea that the arbitration award had prescribed under the Prescription Act 68 of 1969.

The special plea of prescription was upheld and the contempt application was dismissed. No order as to costs was made.

This judgment applies the Constitutional Court’s majority decision in Pieman’s Pantry to the enforcement of arbitration awards, confirming that such awards are subject to prescription. It clarifies that certification under section 143 of the LRA does not transform an arbitration award into a court order or prevent prescription, and it highlights the importance of timeous enforcement of labour arbitration awards.