Procedural missteps sink urgent strike interdict: Umhlathuze Municipality v SAMWU

In early June 2025, the South African Municipal Workers Union (SAMWU) referred a mutual‑interest dispute to the Local Government Bargaining Council and, after conciliation failed, issued a strike notice on 5 June (supplemented on 9 June) announcing industrial action from 17 June 2025.

Believing the planned strike to be unprotected — due to alleged failures in conciliation under section 64(1)(a) of the Labour Relations Act (LRA), participation by essential‑services employees contrary to section 65(1)(d)(i), and breaches of agreed picketing rules — the Umhlathuze Local Municipality launched an urgent application on 23 June 2025 to interdict the strike and declare it unlawful.

Merits: Procedural non‑compliance and lack of urgency

The Labour Court was asked to decide two threshold questions: compliance with the LRA’s notice requirements and whether the matter was sufficiently urgent to bypass the ordinary roll.

1. Notice under Section 68(3)

Section 68(3) mandates that, once a union has given at least ten days’ written notice of intended strike action, an employer must provide the union with at least five business days’ notice of any interdictory application. Despite having more than ten days’ advance warning, the municipality served its urgent application only 48 hours before the hearing; well short of the statutory minimum. This procedural breach alone warranted dismissal.

2. Demonstrable urgency

Rule 38 of the Labour Court Rules requires an urgent‑motion affidavit to set out the circumstances rendering the matter urgent and explain why relief at the main roll would be inadequate. Phehane J found that the municipality, aware by 13 June of the 17 June strike date, delayed filing without justification, cancelled a proposed meeting with the union, did not file a replying affidavit, and inundated the court with voluminous papers mere hours before the hearing. Collectively, these failures demonstrated neither bona fide urgency nor a compelling need to circumvent the ordinary process.

Decision

Given the clear non‑compliance with section 68(3) and the absence of adequately pleaded urgency, the court struck the application off the roll with costs. By doing so, it reaffirmed that strict adherence to procedural prerequisites is an indispensable condition for accessing urgent interdictory relief under the LRA.

Practical implications

For legal practitioners

• Master the notice clocks: Rigorously calculate and comply with the ten‑ and five‑day notice periods to avoid automatic procedural defeat.
• Craft a robust urgency narrative: Detail the precise harm that would flow from delay, cite authorities such, and explain why normal relief is insufficient.
• Engage in good‑faith negotiations: Document meaningful attempts to resolve or narrow disputes before resorting to court, demonstrating to the court that litigation is a last resort.
• Avoid last‑minute filings: Ensure all affidavits and annexures are uploaded and served well before the hearing to give all parties and the court a fair opportunity to prepare.

For employers and clients

• Plan urgent strategies early: Initiate drafting and evidence gathering as soon as potential strike action is signalled to meet strict procedural timelines.
• Consider alternative remedies: Explore interim undertakings or expedited conciliation as less intrusive means of preserving rights without triggering strict urgent‑motion requirements.
• Be prepared for costs sanctions: Procedural lapses in urgent applications not only risk dismissal but also carry a high likelihood of adverse cost orders.

Conclusion

The Umhlathuze Municipality v SAMWU judgment serves as a cautionary tale: even meritorious relief will fail if procedural rules are ignored. As a firm specialising in urgent and interdictory applications and labour law, LNP Beyond Legal champions rigorous preparation, disciplined process‑management and strategic engagement, so that when your litigious labour related matter truly is urgent, it sails through the procedural hurdles.

For expert guidance on LRA urgent applications and interdicts, Riona Kalua, Head of our Labour and Employment Team or Dee-dee Mathelela, Head of our Dispute Resolution Practice.