The Workforce Group (Pty) Ltd v Motor Industry Bargaining Council and Others

The Workforce Group (Pty) Ltd, an employment agency operating as a temporary employment service, challenged the validity of an amendment to a collective agreement concluded within the Motor Industry Bargaining Council on 17 September 2010. The amendment restricted employers’ use of temporary employment services and was extended by the Minister of Labour to non-parties in terms of s 32 of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995. Workforce Group applied to the Gauteng Division of the High Court for declaratory relief, alleging that the provisions were unlawful, unconstitutional, vague, ultra vires the Bargaining Council’s constitution, and amounted to a trade boycott. It also challenged the constitutionality of s 32 of the LRA. The High Court dismissed the application with costs. Workforce Group appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal. While the appeal was pending, the collective agreement expired and was successively extended, but new national legislation — the Labour Relations Amendment Act 6 of 2014 — came into force on 1 January 2015, comprehensively regulating temporary employment services and rendering the impugned agreement provisions inoperative.

The appeal was struck from the roll with costs, including the costs of two counsel.

The case is significant for its reaffirmation of South African appellate principles relating to mootness and costs. It underscores that where subsequent events, particularly legislative amendments, render an appeal academic, courts will generally decline to decide the merits. It also clarifies that an appellant who persists with an appeal after it has become moot risks an adverse costs order, reinforcing the responsibility of litigants to reassess their position in light of changed circumstances.