English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The judgment in Nape v INTCS Corporate Solutions (Pty) Ltd (Nape) concerned the proper interpretation of section 198 of the Labour Relations Act (LRA) where employees have been dismissed at the instance of a client in terms of a labour broking agreement. The decision illustrates the problems encountered by employees providing services to a client in terms of these agreements and the need for the broker's right of recourse against its client in order to give effect to the employee's right to fair labour practices. The main thrust of this article focuses on the need to regulate the relationship between the employee, client and labour broker and the impact of the amendments introduced by the Labour Relations Amendment Act (Amendment Act) on the existing law on temporary employment services in terms of section 198 of the LRA.

law, democracy and development

Dismissal of an employee at the instance of a client: Revisiting <i>Nape v INTCS Corporate Solutions (Pty) Ltd </i>in the context of the Labour Relations Amendment Act 6 of 2014

Dismissal of an employee at the instance of a client: Revisiting Nape v INTCS Corporate Solutions (Pty) Ltd in the context of the Labour Relations Amendment Act 6 of 2014