Thomas v Minister of Defence and Military Veterans (506/2013) [2014] ZASCA 109; 2015 (1) SA 253 (SCA) (11 September 2014)

Thomas v Minister of Defence and Military Veterans (506/2013) [2014] ZASCA 109; 2015 (1) SA 253 (SCA) (11 September 2014)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that for the purposes of s 35(1) of the Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act, the State is not regarded as a single employer. Instead, each head of department within the national and provincial spheres of government is considered a separate employer. The COIDA, read with the Public Service Act and the Constitution, envisages multiple employers within the State, including provincial departments and legislative bodies. Dr Thomas was employed by the Western Cape Provincial Department of Health, not by the State as a single entity. Therefore, s 35(1) did not preclude her claim for damages against the Minister of Defence and Military...

Citation
[2014] ZASCA 109
Parties
Appellant: Liesl-Lenore Thomas; Respondent: Minister of Defence and Military Veterans
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 September 2014
Case Number
506/2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Outcome
Appeal upheld; special plea dismissed; trial court order set aside.
Judges
Mpati, Lewis, Cachalia, Mbha, Gorven
Legal Topics
Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act, State Liability, Special Plea, Public Service Employment, Statutory Interpretation
Civil Procedure Delict Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act State Liability Special Plea Public Service Employment Statutory Interpretation

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Liesl-Lenore Thomas

Appellant

Minister of Defence and Military Veterans

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether s 35(1) of the Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act 130 of 1993 precludes an employee of a provincial department from claiming damages against another state entity.
  2. 2 Whether the State is regarded as a single employer for purposes of s 35(1) of COIDA.
  3. 3 Whether the Western Cape Provincial Department of Health is an employer under COIDA.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that for the purposes of s 35(1) of the Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act, the State is not regarded as a single employer. Instead, each head of department within the national and provincial spheres of government is considered a separate employer. The COIDA, read with the Public Service Act and the Constitution, envisages multiple employers within the State, including provincial departments and legislative bodies. Dr Thomas was employed by the Western Cape Provincial Department of Health, not by the State as a single entity. Therefore, s 35(1) did not preclude her claim for damages against the Minister of Defence and Military...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; special plea dismissed; trial court order set aside.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld with costs, including costs for two counsel where so employed.
  • The order of the trial court is set aside and replaced with: 'The special plea is dismissed with costs.'