Virgin Active South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Mathole NO and Others (JR945/01) [2002] ZALCJHB 12 (11 April 2002)

Virgin Active South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Mathole NO and Others (JR945/01) [2002] ZALCJHB 12 (11 April 2002)

The court held that the existence of an employment relationship is a jurisdictional fact that must be determined at the conciliation stage if challenged. Section 191 of the Labour Relations Act allows only a dismissed employee to refer a dispute about dismissal to the CCMA. Therefore, if the status of a party as an employee is disputed, it must be determined by the CCMA at the outset. The court found no basis to interfere with the first respondent's ruling that the CCMA had jurisdiction and that Reddy was an employee. The application for review was dismissed.

Citation
[2002] ZALCJHB 12
Parties
Applicant: Virgin Active South Africa (Proprietary) Ltd; Respondent: L E Mathole N.O.; Respondent: The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Molly Reddy
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 April 2002
Case Number
JR945/01
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Judges
B M Jammy
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of Ccma, Employment Relationship, Review of Jurisdictional Ruling
Labour Law Civil Procedure Jurisdiction of Ccma Employment Relationship Review of Jurisdictional Ruling

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Virgin Active South Africa (Proprietary) Ltd

Applicant

L E Mathole N.O.

Respondent

The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Molly Reddy

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the CCMA has jurisdiction to entertain the dispute referred by the third respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the third respondent was an employee of the applicant for the purposes of the Labour Relations Act.
  3. 3 Whether a jurisdictional fact of employment relationship must be established before conciliation proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the existence of an employment relationship is a jurisdictional fact that must be determined at the conciliation stage if challenged. Section 191 of the Labour Relations Act allows only a dismissed employee to refer a dispute about dismissal to the CCMA. Therefore, if the status of a party as an employee is disputed, it must be determined by the CCMA at the outset. The court found no basis to interfere with the first respondent's ruling that the CCMA had jurisdiction and that Reddy was an employee. The application for review was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • The application to review and set aside the jurisdictional ruling is dismissed.