Primary briefing · Gazette
high impact 55352 · R. 346 of 2026 · 2026-09-08
Public holiday declared: 4 November 2026 for local government elections
Effective from
04 Nov 2026
The President, acting under section 2A of the Public Holidays Act 36 of 1994, has declared 4 November 2026 a public holiday throughout the Republic in connection with local government elections. The proclamation was signed in Johannesburg on 4 September 2026 and gazetted on 8 September 2026. Every employer must now account for public holiday pay, leave entitlements, and operational adjustments under the BCEA and applicable sectoral determinations. Retail, hospitality, and logistics sectors face particular scheduling implications.
Who is affected
All employers across every sectorHR and payroll practitionersRetail, hospitality, and logistics operatorsLabour law practitionersMunicipalities and electoral bodies What this means for practitioners
Update payroll systems to reflect 4 November 2026 as a public holiday with applicable premium pay or paid leave under the BCEA
Review operational rosters and shift schedules for 4 November 2026, particularly in retail and essential services
Advise clients on BCEA section 18 obligations regarding work on public holidays and applicable remuneration rates
Note the election date for any client-facing scheduling or court diary purposes
Primary briefing · Judgment
high impact High Court (Northern Cape Division, Kimberley) · 2026-09-08
Access Bank (South Africa) Limited v De Vos N.O (Senior) and Another (De Vos Boerdery Trust)
Access Bank applied for the provisional sequestration of the De Vos Boerdery Trust, which had bound itself as surety and co-principal debtor under an unlimited suretyship for the debts of De Vos Landgoed (Pty) Ltd. The principal debtor was in business rescue. The Trust resisted on the basis that the s 133 moratorium barred enforcement, that its suretyship liability should not count for factual insolvency, and that its right of recourse against the principal debtor was an offsetting asset.
The court held: The court granted provisional sequestration. It held that the s 133 moratorium is a defence in personam available only to the company in business rescue and cannot be raised by a surety. The Trust's liability as surety and co-principal debtor was not contingent and must be included among its liabilities for factual insolvency purposes. The Trust's right of recourse against the principal debtor had not accrued because the Trust had not yet paid the creditor, so it could not be treated as an asset. The court was satisfied on a prima facie basis that the bank was a creditor, the Trust was factually insolvent, and sequestration would advantage creditors. A rule nisi returnable on 16 October 2026 was issued.
Legal impact: Confirms that banks and creditors can enforce suretyships notwithstanding the principal debtor being in business rescue, removing a defence sometimes raised by sureties. Reinforces that suretyship obligations as co-principal debtor are not contingent liabilities and must be counted for insolvency. Clarifies that a surety's common-law recourse right does not accrue as an asset until the surety has actually paid the creditor. Practitioners advising creditors on enforcement strategy against sureties linked to companies in business rescue can rely on these principles.
Who is affected
Banks and lending institutions enforcing suretyshipsInsolvency practitionersTrustees of inter vivos trusts acting as suretiesBusiness rescue practitionersCommercial litigation practitioners What this means for practitioners
Creditors holding suretyships where the principal debtor is in business rescue should note that the s 133 moratorium does not bar enforcement against the surety
When assessing a surety's factual solvency, include the full suretyship liability and do not offset an unaccrued right of recourse against the principal debtor
Monitor the return date of 16 October 2026 for the final sequestration hearing if acting for similarly situated parties