Botha and Another v Department Education, Arts, Culture & Sport, Northern Province Government and Others (J3797/98) [1999] ZALC 110 (23 July 1999)

Botha and Another v Department Education, Arts, Culture & Sport, Northern Province Government and Others (J3797/98) [1999] ZALC 110 (23 July 1999)

The Labour Court has jurisdiction to entertain the application and grant the relief sought by the applicants. The Court found that, by virtue of its inherent powers and the provisions of the Labour Relations Act and the Basic Conditions of Employment Act, it may enforce its own orders, review the conduct of the State as employer, and grant declaratory relief regarding the legality of the respondents' actions. The applicants are employed by both the State and a public school, which constitutes a composite employer exercising public power. The Court may scrutinize the termination of the 'top-up' salaries and, if found unlawful, order payment of remuneration due after 1 December 1998. The...

Citation
[1999] ZALC 110
Parties
Applicant: Adriaan Jacobus Botha; Applicant: Elizabeth Venter; Respondent: Department of Education, Arts, Culture & Sports, Northern Province Government; Respondent: Minister of Education; Respondent: Settlers Agricultural High School; Respondent: Governing Body, Settlers Agricultural High School; Respondent: Premier, Northern Province
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 July 1999
Case Number
J3797/98
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Jurisdictional Point in Limine; Interlocutory Order
Outcome
The respondents' jurisdictional point in limine is dismissed with costs. Special costs are awarded against the respondents for late filing of heads of argument. The matter is set down for hearing of further points in limine and the merits.
Judges
de Villiers
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of Labour Court, Contract of Employment, Remuneration Disputes, Constitutional Validity of Legislation, Costs Orders, State as Employer
Labour Law Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Jurisdiction of Labour Court Contract of Employment Remuneration Disputes Constitutional Validity of Legislation Costs Orders +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 26 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Adriaan Jacobus Botha

Applicant

Elizabeth Venter

Applicant

Department of Education, Arts, Culture & Sports, Northern Province Government

Respondent

Minister of Education

Respondent

Settlers Agricultural High School

Respondent

Governing Body, Settlers Agricultural High School

Respondent

Premier, Northern Province

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Jurisdictional Point in Limine; Interlocutory Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the Labour Court have jurisdiction to entertain disputes regarding remuneration and enforcement of employment contracts arising prior to 1 December 1998?
  2. 2 Is the termination of the applicants' 'top-up' salaries by the respondents lawful?
  3. 3 Can the Labour Court declare relevant legislation unconstitutional in the context of employment disputes?

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Court has jurisdiction to entertain the application and grant the relief sought by the applicants. The Court found that, by virtue of its inherent powers and the provisions of the Labour Relations Act and the Basic Conditions of Employment Act, it may enforce its own orders, review the conduct of the State as employer, and grant declaratory relief regarding the legality of the respondents' actions. The applicants are employed by both the State and a public school, which constitutes a composite employer exercising public power. The Court may scrutinize the termination of the 'top-up' salaries and, if found unlawful, order payment of remuneration due after 1 December 1998. The...

Court Disposition

The respondents' jurisdictional point in limine is dismissed with costs. Special costs are awarded against the respondents for late filing of heads of argument. The matter is set down for hearing of further points in limine and the merits.

Orders

  • The respondents' point in limine regarding jurisdiction is dismissed with costs.
  • The respondents are ordered to pay the costs occasioned by the applicants' attorney's preparation of supplementary heads of argument on the attorney and client scale.