Makhanya v NUMSA: Central Committee Must Determine Regional Congress Validity

On 22 October 2026, the Labour Court of South Africa, Johannesburg, in Makhanya v National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa and Others, determined that the Central Committee, rather than individual National Office Bearers, holds the authority to determine the validity of regional congresses within the union, granting interim relief to protect delegation participation.

This ruling is highly significant for trade unions, their members, and labour lawyers in South Africa, as it provides crucial clarity on internal governance structures and the locus of power within unions, particularly concerning the validity of internal democratic processes like regional congresses. It underscores the paramount importance of adhering strictly to union constitutions and established decision-making protocols. Furthermore, it highlights the Labour Court's willingness and role in intervening to protect democratic principles within unions, especially when internal disputes threaten fair representation and the legitimate functioning of union structures.

This matter falls under South African labour law, specifically concerning the internal affairs of trade unions as regulated by the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (LRA). The LRA provides for the registration and regulation of trade unions and sets out principles of fair labour practices, which extend to the internal democratic functioning of unions. The Labour Court, established under the LRA, has exclusive jurisdiction over disputes arising from the Act, including those pertaining to union constitutions and internal governance. The granting of interim relief is a common remedy in urgent applications, designed to preserve the status quo or prevent irreparable harm pending a final determination of the dispute.

The key parties involved were Makhanya, presumably a member or faction within the union, and the National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA), along with "Others" who likely represent other union officials or bodies. The case was heard by the Labour Court of South Africa, Johannesburg. The outcome of the matter is not explicitly reported beyond the granting of interim relief.

Attorneys advising trade unions or their members must meticulously review union constitutions to understand the precise allocation of powers and responsibilities among different internal structures. This judgment reinforces that internal disputes regarding governance and democratic processes can be brought before the Labour Court, which will scrutinise adherence to constitutional provisions. Unions should ensure their internal decision-making processes, especially those impacting delegate participation and congress validity, are transparent and strictly compliant with their own governing documents to avoid costly and disruptive litigation.