⋆ ⋆ ⋆
]]
LLW2601: Individual Labour Law
May/June Examination 2026 Preparation Guide
Covers Past Papers from 2023 to 2025
⋆ ⋄ ⋆ ⋄ ⋆ ⋄ ⋆ ⋄ ⋆
South African Labour Law – UNISA College of Law
Exam Revision Guide
LLW2601
Module Code:
Individual Labour Law
Module Name:
May/June 2023 & May/June 2024
Papers Covered:
May/June 2026 Examinations
Prepared For:
60 Marks per Paper (4 Questions)
Total Marks:
4 Hours (Take-Home Format)
Duration:
All answers are study notes for revision purposes. Apply principles to facts – do not
merely quote legislation.
Exam Revision Notes | LLW2601 | 2023–2025 Coverage
,LLW2601 | Individual Labour Law – Exam Revision May/June 2026 Preparation
PART 1: UNIVERSITY EXAMINATIONS
May/June 2024
LLW2601 – Individual Labour Law | 60 Marks | Duration: 4 Hours
First Examiner: Mr D Rammila Second Examiner: Ms MM Mulaudzi
Question 1 [20 marks]
Question: Ms Eastwood was employed as an administrative assistant at Horizon Enter-
prises. She claims that her supervisor, Mr Oldman, subjected her to unwelcome conduct
on multiple occasions throughout the year 2023 which made her feel uncomfortable. The
conduct included remarks about the shape of her body, her “sexiness”, and other unsolicited
romantic advances.
The inappropriate behaviour persisted, and in September 2023 she reached out to Ms
Daley, the company’s employee relations specialist, to report Mr Oldman’s conduct. Ms
Daley acts on behalf of Horizon Enterprises over all employee relations matters. Despite
her report, Ms Daley made no attempt to address her complaints. Instead, Ms Daley told
Ms Eastwood that she was overreacting, and that Mr Oldman’s behaviour was just “boys
being boys”.
Feeling very uncomfortable and unable to continue working with Mr Oldman, Ms East-
wood tendered her resignation in November 2023. Ms Eastwood now seeks legal advice
from you on how to proceed in light of these events. With reference to legislation and
case law, analyse Ms Eastwood’s legal situation and advise on any possible remedy she
may have against her former employer, Horizon Enterprises. (NB: You must apply the
principles to the facts. You need NOT discuss constructive dismissal.)
Answer: Legal Framework – Sexual Harassment Under the EEA
Ms Eastwood’s situation is governed by the Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998
(EEA) and the Code of Good Practice on the Handling of Sexual Harassment
Cases in the Workplace (the Code), issued under that Act.
Page 2 of 25
, LLW2601 | Individual Labour Law – Exam Revision May/June 2026 Preparation
Key Concept
Sexual harassment is a form of unfair discrimination based on sex, gender, or sex-
ual orientation. Section 6(3) of the EEA provides that harassment of an employee
is a form of unfair discrimination.
What Qualifies as Sexual Harassment?
The Code defines sexual harassment as unwanted conduct of a sexual nature. Here is
the thing – “unwanted” is key. Conduct is unwanted if the recipient did not invite or
welcome it. The remarks about Ms Eastwood’s body and “sexiness”, plus the unsolicited
romantic advances from Mr Oldman, fit squarely within this definition. The conduct
was:
• Unwanted – she reported it to Ms Daley, which is clear evidence she did not
welcome it;
• Of a sexual nature – body remarks and romantic advances fall within this cate-
gory;
• Persistent – it occurred multiple times throughout 2023.
Employer Liability
This is where Horizon Enterprises faces serious exposure. Under the EEA, an employer
is vicariously liable for acts of sexual harassment committed by its employees in the
course of employment – unless the employer can show it took steps to eliminate the
conduct. Horizon did the opposite. Ms Daley, who was acting on behalf of the employer,
dismissed the complaint outright and told Ms Eastwood she was “overreacting.” That
response alone confirms the employer’s failure.
The Code places a positive duty on employers to take reasonable steps to address harass-
ment. Failing to investigate or discipline Mr Oldman after the September 2023 report
means Horizon Enterprises directly breached this duty.
Example
In Ntsabo v Real Security CC [2003] 11 BLLR 1121 (LC), the court confirmed
that an employer who fails to act on reported sexual harassment is liable for that
failure. The employer’s inaction is treated as ratification of the harasser’s conduct.
Possible Remedies for Ms Eastwood
Ms Eastwood may refer a dispute of unfair discrimination to the Commission for Con-
Page 3 of 25
]]
LLW2601: Individual Labour Law
May/June Examination 2026 Preparation Guide
Covers Past Papers from 2023 to 2025
⋆ ⋄ ⋆ ⋄ ⋆ ⋄ ⋆ ⋄ ⋆
South African Labour Law – UNISA College of Law
Exam Revision Guide
LLW2601
Module Code:
Individual Labour Law
Module Name:
May/June 2023 & May/June 2024
Papers Covered:
May/June 2026 Examinations
Prepared For:
60 Marks per Paper (4 Questions)
Total Marks:
4 Hours (Take-Home Format)
Duration:
All answers are study notes for revision purposes. Apply principles to facts – do not
merely quote legislation.
Exam Revision Notes | LLW2601 | 2023–2025 Coverage
,LLW2601 | Individual Labour Law – Exam Revision May/June 2026 Preparation
PART 1: UNIVERSITY EXAMINATIONS
May/June 2024
LLW2601 – Individual Labour Law | 60 Marks | Duration: 4 Hours
First Examiner: Mr D Rammila Second Examiner: Ms MM Mulaudzi
Question 1 [20 marks]
Question: Ms Eastwood was employed as an administrative assistant at Horizon Enter-
prises. She claims that her supervisor, Mr Oldman, subjected her to unwelcome conduct
on multiple occasions throughout the year 2023 which made her feel uncomfortable. The
conduct included remarks about the shape of her body, her “sexiness”, and other unsolicited
romantic advances.
The inappropriate behaviour persisted, and in September 2023 she reached out to Ms
Daley, the company’s employee relations specialist, to report Mr Oldman’s conduct. Ms
Daley acts on behalf of Horizon Enterprises over all employee relations matters. Despite
her report, Ms Daley made no attempt to address her complaints. Instead, Ms Daley told
Ms Eastwood that she was overreacting, and that Mr Oldman’s behaviour was just “boys
being boys”.
Feeling very uncomfortable and unable to continue working with Mr Oldman, Ms East-
wood tendered her resignation in November 2023. Ms Eastwood now seeks legal advice
from you on how to proceed in light of these events. With reference to legislation and
case law, analyse Ms Eastwood’s legal situation and advise on any possible remedy she
may have against her former employer, Horizon Enterprises. (NB: You must apply the
principles to the facts. You need NOT discuss constructive dismissal.)
Answer: Legal Framework – Sexual Harassment Under the EEA
Ms Eastwood’s situation is governed by the Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998
(EEA) and the Code of Good Practice on the Handling of Sexual Harassment
Cases in the Workplace (the Code), issued under that Act.
Page 2 of 25
, LLW2601 | Individual Labour Law – Exam Revision May/June 2026 Preparation
Key Concept
Sexual harassment is a form of unfair discrimination based on sex, gender, or sex-
ual orientation. Section 6(3) of the EEA provides that harassment of an employee
is a form of unfair discrimination.
What Qualifies as Sexual Harassment?
The Code defines sexual harassment as unwanted conduct of a sexual nature. Here is
the thing – “unwanted” is key. Conduct is unwanted if the recipient did not invite or
welcome it. The remarks about Ms Eastwood’s body and “sexiness”, plus the unsolicited
romantic advances from Mr Oldman, fit squarely within this definition. The conduct
was:
• Unwanted – she reported it to Ms Daley, which is clear evidence she did not
welcome it;
• Of a sexual nature – body remarks and romantic advances fall within this cate-
gory;
• Persistent – it occurred multiple times throughout 2023.
Employer Liability
This is where Horizon Enterprises faces serious exposure. Under the EEA, an employer
is vicariously liable for acts of sexual harassment committed by its employees in the
course of employment – unless the employer can show it took steps to eliminate the
conduct. Horizon did the opposite. Ms Daley, who was acting on behalf of the employer,
dismissed the complaint outright and told Ms Eastwood she was “overreacting.” That
response alone confirms the employer’s failure.
The Code places a positive duty on employers to take reasonable steps to address harass-
ment. Failing to investigate or discipline Mr Oldman after the September 2023 report
means Horizon Enterprises directly breached this duty.
Example
In Ntsabo v Real Security CC [2003] 11 BLLR 1121 (LC), the court confirmed
that an employer who fails to act on reported sexual harassment is liable for that
failure. The employer’s inaction is treated as ratification of the harasser’s conduct.
Possible Remedies for Ms Eastwood
Ms Eastwood may refer a dispute of unfair discrimination to the Commission for Con-
Page 3 of 25
