Hulane and Another v Msunduzi Municipality (3445/09) [2010] ZAKZPHC 94; 2012 (3) SA 121 (KZP) (7 May 2010)

Hulane and Another v Msunduzi Municipality (3445/09) [2010] ZAKZPHC 94; 2012 (3) SA 121 (KZP) (7 May 2010)

The court held that the applicants' claim, when stripped to its essentials, is a dispute regarding remuneration and the enforcement of employment contracts with the respondent municipality. The pleadings do not allege any infringement of administrative rights or fundamental rights that would justify High Court jurisdiction. The claim is essentially a labour dispute, and in terms of section 157(1) of the Labour Relations Act, the Labour Court has exclusive jurisdiction over such matters. The High Court cannot entertain the application as it lacks jurisdiction. The application is therefore dismissed.

Citation
[2010] ZAKZPHC 94
Parties
Applicant: Z Hulane; Applicant: P Mashoko; Respondent: Msunduzi Municipality
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 May 2010
Case Number
3445/09
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Motion Proceedings Before the High Court
Outcome
Application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. No order as to costs.
Judges
Steyn
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of High Court, Exclusive Jurisdiction of Labour Court, Contract of Employment, Administrative Action, Remuneration Dispute
Labour Law Civil Procedure Jurisdiction of High Court Exclusive Jurisdiction of Labour Court Contract of Employment Administrative Action Remuneration Dispute

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Z Hulane

Applicant

P Mashoko

Applicant

Msunduzi Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Motion Proceedings Before the High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the High Court have jurisdiction to determine a dispute concerning the validity and enforcement of employment contracts between the applicants and the respondent municipality.
  2. 2 Does the applicants' claim amount to administrative action under PAJA or is it a labour dispute falling within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Labour Court.
  3. 3 Is the claim based on contract or does it involve an infringement of fundamental rights justifying High Court jurisdiction.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the applicants' claim, when stripped to its essentials, is a dispute regarding remuneration and the enforcement of employment contracts with the respondent municipality. The pleadings do not allege any infringement of administrative rights or fundamental rights that would justify High Court jurisdiction. The claim is essentially a labour dispute, and in terms of section 157(1) of the Labour Relations Act, the Labour Court has exclusive jurisdiction over such matters. The High Court cannot entertain the application as it lacks jurisdiction. The application is therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. No order as to costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • Each party is to pay its own costs.