Skulpad and Another v Department of Health Eastern Cape and Others (PR139/21) [2024] ZALCPE 45; [2025] 1 BLLR 70 (LC); (2025) 46 ILJ 193 (LC) (30 October 2024)

Skulpad and Another v Department of Health Eastern Cape and Others (PR139/21) [2024] ZALCPE 45; [2025] 1 BLLR 70 (LC); (2025) 46 ILJ 193 (LC) (30 October 2024)

Section 24 of the Labour Relations Act does not strip employees of their common law right to refer disputes about the application and interpretation of collective agreements. The arbitrator's ruling, which relied on the interpretation that only unions may refer section 24 disputes, was based on flawed precedent and a misreading of the statutory language. The distinction between 'party to the dispute' and 'party to the collective agreement' is clear in the Act, and the broad wording allows employees with a direct and substantial interest to refer such disputes. The exclusion of employees from access to justice is unconstitutional, discriminatory, and inconsistent with the objects of the...

Citation
[2024] ZALCPE 45
Parties
Applicant: Monica Skulpad; Applicant: Public Service Coordinating Bargaining Council; Respondent: Department of Health (Eastern Cape); Respondent: John Cheere Robertson N.O.; Respondent: Member of Executive Council: Department of Health (Eastern Cape)
Court
Labour Court Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 October 2024
Case Number
PR139/21
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitrator's Ruling
Outcome
Application for review granted; arbitrator's ruling set aside; applicant permitted to re-enrol her dispute.
Judges
P N Kroon
Legal Topics
Locus Standi, Collective Agreements, Interpretation of Statutes, Access to Justice, Constitutional Rights, Review of Arbitration Awards
Labour Law Civil Procedure Locus Standi Collective Agreements Interpretation of Statutes Access to Justice Constitutional Rights Review of Arbitration Awards

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 6 Authorities cited 29 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Monica Skulpad

Applicant

Public Service Coordinating Bargaining Council

Applicant

Department of Health (Eastern Cape)

Respondent

John Cheere Robertson N.O.

Respondent

Member of Executive Council: Department of Health (Eastern Cape)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitrator's Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 24 of the Labour Relations Act strips employees of the right to refer disputes about the application and interpretation of collective agreements.
  2. 2 Whether only trade unions may refer section 24 disputes, excluding individual employees.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator's ruling barring the applicant from pursuing her dispute was legally sustainable.

Ratio Decidendi

Section 24 of the Labour Relations Act does not strip employees of their common law right to refer disputes about the application and interpretation of collective agreements. The arbitrator's ruling, which relied on the interpretation that only unions may refer section 24 disputes, was based on flawed precedent and a misreading of the statutory language. The distinction between 'party to the dispute' and 'party to the collective agreement' is clear in the Act, and the broad wording allows employees with a direct and substantial interest to refer such disputes. The exclusion of employees from access to justice is unconstitutional, discriminatory, and inconsistent with the objects of the...

Court Disposition

Application for review granted; arbitrator's ruling set aside; applicant permitted to re-enrol her dispute.

Orders

  • The Member of the Executive Council: Department of Health (Eastern Cape) is joined as the Third Respondent.
  • The late bringing of the review application by the First Applicant is condoned.