Food and Allied Workers’ Union obo J Gaoshubelwe v Pieman’s Pantry (Pty) Limited

Employees of Pieman’s Pantry were dismissed on 1 August 2001 for alleged participation in an unprotected strike. FAWU referred an unfair dismissal dispute to the CCMA for conciliation on 7 August 2001. The dispute remained unresolved and a certificate of non‑resolution was issued on 3 September 2001. After unsuccessful arbitration and review proceedings concerning jurisdiction, FAWU referred the dispute to the Labour Court on 16 March 2005 for adjudication under section 191(5)(b) of the Labour Relations Act (LRA). Pieman’s raised a special plea that the claim had prescribed under the Prescription Act. The Labour Court and Labour Appeal Court upheld the plea, holding that the Prescription Act applied and that the claim had prescribed. FAWU appealed to the Constitutional Court.

Leave to appeal granted; appeal upheld; orders of the Labour Court and Labour Appeal Court set aside; the Labour Court’s order replaced with one dismissing the special plea of prescription; no order as to costs.

The case settles an important and previously contested question in South African labour law by confirming that the Prescription Act does not apply to unfair dismissal claims brought under section 191 of the LRA. It affirms the constitutional character of labour dispute resolution and protects employees’ access to statutory remedies without the additional hurdle of civil prescription.