Browse
Recent Submissions
Item Embargo Reconfiguring Employment Contracts in the Fourth Industrial Revolution: A South African Labour Law Perspective(2026-05-19) Netshishivhe, Ndirenda Bennet; Mbiada, Carlos JoelTichawouo; Lavhengwa, LivhuwaniThe rapid expansion of platform-based and gig work has disrupted traditional labour market structures and exposed important regulatory gaps in labour law. This study examines the classification of platform workers and the adequacy of existing legal frameworks in addressing the challenges posed by algorithmic management, data-driven decisionmaking, and the erosion of standard employment protections. Drawing on comparative analysis of South African law and key international developments, the study evaluates how courts and legislatures grapple with the tension between contractual autonomy and the realities of subordination and dependency in platform work. Specific attention is paid to the implications of worker misclassification, the applicability of minimum labour standards, and the emerging role of data protection and algorithmic transparency in safeguarding rights. The findings reveal that -while traditional tests of employment remain relevant- they require adaptation to capture the refined realities of platform-mediated labour. The study concludes by proposing context-sensitive reforms that aim at harmonising labour regulation and ensuring meaningful protection for gig workers in the evolving digital economy.Item Open Access Piercing the corporate veil: a critical analysis of Section 20(9) of the Companies Act 71 of 2008(2017-05-18) Phiri, Siphethile; Nwafor, A. O.; Letuka, P. P.Once a company is incorporated it becomes a juristic entity, distinct and separate from its incorporators. Thus, the company bears its own liabilities. However, section 20(9) of the Companies Act 71 of 2008 grants the courts the discretion to disregard the separate legal personality of a company where there is unconscionable abuse of the juristic personality of the company. However, the challenge is that the section fails to define what constitutes ‘‘unconscionable abuse’’. This research thus investigated what constitutes unconscionable abuse of the juristic personality of the company as the ground for piercing the corporate veil. Simply put, this research identified the circumstances under which the corporate veil may be pierced, given the confounding provisions of section 20(9). In unravelling the problems posed by the said section, the researcher employed a combination of doctrinal legal research methodology and comparative research methodology which involve the scrutiny of ‘black letter of the law’ and the laws of other jurisdictions. The result from this extensive inquiry is that the term ‘unconscionable abuse’ is a legislative derivate from the various terms used by the courts at common law to justify the disregarding of the separate legal personality of the corporate entity. Therefore, the inescapable conclusion reached is that just as those terms used at common law are confounding, so shall this legislative innovation. Therefore, in order to resolve this problem each matter should be dealt with based on its peculiar facts.