Keswa and Another v Office of Premier and Others (D320/23) [2025] ZALCD 5 (10 February 2025)

Keswa and Another v Office of Premier and Others (D320/23) [2025] ZALCD 5 (10 February 2025)

The court found that no binding decision was made by the first respondent to upgrade the applicants' posts from level 9 to 12, as the necessary approvals were not obtained and the job evaluation process was incomplete. The applicants' reliance on submissions and recommendations did not amount to a final decision. The court further held that the bargaining council does have jurisdiction over the applicants' unfair labour practice dispute concerning the provision of benefits, as grading disputes are encompassed within such claims under the LRA. The arbitrator's ruling denying jurisdiction was therefore incorrect and set aside. The legality review was dismissed, but the matter was remitted...

Citation
[2025] ZALCD 5
Parties
Applicant: Nomava Rejoice Keswa; Applicant: Raashna Reddy; Respondent: Office of the Premier; Respondent: Department of Public Service and Administration; Respondent: GPSSBC; Respondent: Commissioner Wayne Paul
Court
Labour Court Durban
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 February 2025
Case Number
D320/23
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Legality review dismissed; arbitration ruling set aside; dispute remitted for rehearing.
Judges
Whitcher
Legal Topics
Unfair Labour Practice, Job Evaluation, Jurisdiction of Bargaining Council, Legality Review, Provision of Benefits
Labour Law Administrative Law Unfair Labour Practice Job Evaluation Jurisdiction of Bargaining Council Legality Review Provision of Benefits

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nomava Rejoice Keswa

Applicant

Raashna Reddy

Applicant

Office of the Premier

Respondent

Department of Public Service and Administration

Respondent

GPSSBC

Respondent

Commissioner Wayne Paul

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the first and second respondents made a binding decision to upgrade the applicants' posts from level 9 to 12.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants are entitled to retrospective implementation and backpay upon upgrading.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitration ruling denying jurisdiction to the bargaining council was correct.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that no binding decision was made by the first respondent to upgrade the applicants' posts from level 9 to 12, as the necessary approvals were not obtained and the job evaluation process was incomplete. The applicants' reliance on submissions and recommendations did not amount to a final decision. The court further held that the bargaining council does have jurisdiction over the applicants' unfair labour practice dispute concerning the provision of benefits, as grading disputes are encompassed within such claims under the LRA. The arbitrator's ruling denying jurisdiction was therefore incorrect and set aside. The legality review was dismissed, but the matter was remitted...

Court Disposition

Legality review dismissed; arbitration ruling set aside; dispute remitted for rehearing.

Orders

  • The legality review application is dismissed.
  • The ruling rendered by the fourth respondent on 2 May 2023 is reviewed and set aside and substituted with a ruling that the bargaining council has jurisdiction to decide the applicants' unfair labour practice dispute concerning the provision of benefits.