UASA – The Union v Western Platinum (Pty) Ltd and Others

UASA, Solidarity and the National Union of Mineworkers formed a coalition to seek organisational rights at Western Platinum and Eastern Platinum (Lonmin) under sections 12, 13 and 15 of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 (LRA). After Lonmin refused, the dispute was referred to the CCMA, which issued an arbitration award on 12 November 2018 granting the coalition organisational rights, including stop-order deductions. AMCU launched a review of the award, but it was not stayed. Lonmin failed to implement stop-order deductions, leading the appellants to have the award certified under section 143(3) of the LRA and to bring an urgent application in the Labour Court to compel compliance. The Labour Court dismissed the application, holding that contempt proceedings were the appropriate remedy, and ordered the appellants to pay costs without providing reasons. By the time the appeal was heard, Lonmin had implemented the stop orders, rendering the substantive dispute moot. The appellants persisted only with the appeal against the costs order.

The appeal against the costs order was upheld. Paragraph 4 of the Labour Court’s order was set aside and replaced with an order that there is no order as to costs. No costs order was made in the appeal.

The judgment reaffirms that in labour matters, costs do not follow the result as a matter of course and that courts must consider law and fairness under section 162 of the LRA. It clarifies that a failure to give reasons for a costs order can constitute a misdirection justifying appellate interference, and that such a misdirection may amount to exceptional circumstances allowing an appeal on costs alone despite mootness.