Skip to content
Close Menu
ConvictionConviction
  • Home
  • Law & Justice
  • Special Reports
  • Opinion
  • Ask The Expert
  • Get In Touch

Subscribe to Updates

Get the latest creative news from FooBar about art, design and business.

What's Hot

Constitutional Court draws clear line between SAHRC and other Chapter 9 bodies

April 22, 2026

Firm stance against University of Limpopo lecturer who refused to teach

April 22, 2026

Spouse has no claim to property under accrual system before divorce is finalised

April 22, 2026
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Trending
  • Constitutional Court draws clear line between SAHRC and other Chapter 9 bodies
  • Firm stance against University of Limpopo lecturer who refused to teach
  • Spouse has no claim to property under accrual system before divorce is finalised
  • Courier delivery recognised as valid for RAF claims in landmark case
  • We need feminist consciousness in political leadership and power structures
  • Johannesburg Valuation Appeal Board decision set aside for disregarding rates policies
  • Unisa law expert’s scholarly work geared to assist victims of GBV
  • R1.37 million in ATM cash goes missing under G4S custodians’ watch, gross negligence found
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
ConvictionConviction
Demo
  • Home
  • Law & Justice
  • Special Reports
  • Opinion
  • Ask The Expert
  • Get In Touch
ConvictionConviction
Home » Firm stance against University of Limpopo lecturer who refused to teach
Labour Law

Firm stance against University of Limpopo lecturer who refused to teach

Lecturer’s refusal to teach for months found unjustifiable, with court stressing harm caused to students and academic programme.
Kennedy MudzuliBy Kennedy MudzuliApril 22, 2026No Comments
Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn WhatsApp Reddit Tumblr Email
blank
Lecturer Phindile Raymond Msaule loses Labour Court bid after refusing to teach for three months, with the court condemning the impact on students and upholding disciplinary action.
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email
  • The Labour Court dismissed a review application by a University of Limpopo lecturer who refused to teach.
  • The court found that abandoning teaching duties justified disciplinary action and punishment.
  • The arbitration award was upheld as reasonable, with no order for costs.

The Labour Court has firmly addressed a lecturer’s refusal to carry out teaching duties, dismissing a review application from Phindile Raymond Msaule and confirming that his actions warranted discipline.

Acting Judge N Tshisevhe stated that withdrawing teaching services, especially in an academic environment, has serious consequences and cannot be justified by workplace disputes.

Msaule sought the court's intervention to review and overturn an arbitration award from the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration, which ruled that the University of Limpopo had not engaged in unfair labour practices. The court upheld this decision, finding no reason to intervene.

Refusal to teach triggers disciplinary action

The conflict began when Professor SL Rapulana, the head of the department, decided to share a criminal law module with Msaule as co-lecturers. This change was prompted by concerns about students' poor performance.

Msaule disagreed with this arrangement and took the issue to senior university management, including Advocate Rapatsa and Professor O Sibanda. Despite these efforts, the university stood by its decision. Consequently, Msaule refused to teach the module, did not prepare assessments, and neglected his academic responsibilities for about three months.

This refusal led to the misconduct charges against him. He was found guilty of insubordination and neglect of duties, resulting in a three-month suspension without pay and a final written warning.

Court condemns refusal to perform duties

The court clearly criticised Msaule's behaviour. Judge Tshisevhe said, "I find it unacceptable that a lecturer can refuse to fulfil his teaching duties to the detriment of students."

The judgment emphasised that employees must follow lawful instructions while seeking internal remedies. Judge Tshisevhe noted that, “even if the Applicant could have filed a grievance, which he did not do, he should have fulfilled his duties and sought to address his concerns while continuing to work.”

The court also pointed out the negative impact of the refusal to teach. “This court does not want to imagine the frustration caused to students because of the applicant's withdrawal of his services,” the judgment read.

Judge Tshisevhe dismissed Msaule’s justification. “The Applicant’s conduct is inexcusable in this situation, even if it were found that he had filed a grievance.”

Arbitration award upheld

The arbitrator concluded that Msaule did not follow a reasonable and lawful instruction and that the punishment given was suitable. It was also found that he had not correctly filed a grievance according to the university’s procedures.

Using the test from Sidumo and Another v Rustenburg Platinum Mines Ltd and Others, the court evaluated whether the arbitrator's decision was one that a reasonable decision-maker could reach. Acting Judge Tshisevhe confirmed this view, stating, “I am convinced that the arbitrator's finding is a reasonable one based on the evidence presented.”

The court rejected Msaule’s claims that the arbitrator mischaracterised the dispute or overlooked important facts, concluding that none of the alleged errors was enough to make the award unreasonable.

No interference and no costs

The court found no reviewable irregularity and determined that the arbitrator’s decision fell within the range of reasonable outcomes. Judge Tshisevhe concluded, “There are no grounds for me to interfere with the arbitrator's decision, as it remains within the range of reasonableness.”

Regarding costs, the court referenced Zungu v Premier of the Province of KwaZulu-Natal and Others, emphasising that labour matters need a balanced approach. Acting Judge Tshisevhe decided that fairness justified not making any order about costs.

The application for review was dismissed, and no costs order was issued.

Conviction.co.za

Get your news on the go. Clickhere to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.

CCMA Employment Discipline judicial review Labour law Lecturer Misconduct
Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Telegram Email
Kennedy Mudzuli

    Multiple award-winner with passion for news and training young journalists. Founder and editor of Conviction.co.za

    Related Posts

    R1.37 million in ATM cash goes missing under G4S custodians’ watch, gross negligence found

    April 21, 2026

    Splicing gun dispute turns violent as worker strikes colleague on the factory floor

    April 21, 2026

    Thousands of higher earners to lose overtime and rest protections from May 1

    April 19, 2026
    Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

    Prove your humanity: 1   +   10   =  

    Subscribe to our newsletter:
    Top Posts

    Making sectional title rules that work: A practical guide

    January 17, 2025

    Protection order among the consequences of trespassing in an ‘Exclusive Use Area’

    December 31, 2024

    Between a rock and a foul-smelling place

    November 27, 2024

    Irregular levy increases, mismanagement, and legal threats in a sectional title scheme

    June 2, 2025
    Don't Miss
    Constitutional Law
    5 Mins Read

    Constitutional Court draws clear line between SAHRC and other Chapter 9 bodies

    By Kennedy MudzuliApril 22, 20265 Mins Read

    The Constitutional Court has confirmed that the SAHRC cannot issue binding directives, drawing a clear distinction between its facilitative role and the coercive powers granted to other Chapter 9 institutions.

    Firm stance against University of Limpopo lecturer who refused to teach

    April 22, 2026

    Spouse has no claim to property under accrual system before divorce is finalised

    April 22, 2026

    Courier delivery recognised as valid for RAF claims in landmark case

    April 22, 2026
    Stay In Touch
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • WhatsApp
    Demo
    About Us
    About Us

    Helping South Africans to navigate the legal landscape; providing accessible legal information; and giving a voice to those seeking justice.

    Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp
    Our Picks

    Constitutional Court draws clear line between SAHRC and other Chapter 9 bodies

    April 22, 2026

    Firm stance against University of Limpopo lecturer who refused to teach

    April 22, 2026

    Spouse has no claim to property under accrual system before divorce is finalised

    April 22, 2026
    Most Popular

    Making sectional title rules that work: A practical guide

    January 17, 2025

    Protection order among the consequences of trespassing in an ‘Exclusive Use Area’

    December 31, 2024

    Between a rock and a foul-smelling place

    November 27, 2024
    © 2026 Conviction.
    • Home
    • Law & Justice
    • Special Reports
    • Opinion
    • Ask The Expert
    • Get In Touch

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.