Workmen's Compensation Commissioner v Jooste (273/96) [1997] ZASCA 58; 1997 (4) SA 418 (SCA); [1997] 3 All SA 157 (A); (1997) 18 ILJ 488 (SCA) (29 May 1997)

Workmen's Compensation Commissioner v Jooste (273/96) [1997] ZASCA 58; 1997 (4) SA 418 (SCA); [1997] 3 All SA 157 (A); (1997) 18 ILJ 488 (SCA) (29 May 1997)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the amendment to the Second Schedule of the Workmen's Compensation Act, which added occupational asthma as a scheduled disease, was not retrospective. The respondent ceased to be a workman before the amendment took effect on 1 January 1993. The requirements of section 89 were not satisfied, as the respondent was not a workman suffering from a scheduled disease at the relevant time. The Minister did not exercise the power to make the amendment retrospective, and the legislative intention was clear from the explicit wording of the Government Notice. The court found that any other interpretation would contradict the statutory scheme and the intention of...

Citation
[1997] ZASCA 58
Parties
Appellant: Workmen's Compensation Commissioner; Respondent: Suzanna Jooste
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 May 1997
Case Number
273/96
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Full Bench of Cape of Good Hope Provincial Division
Outcome
Appeal allowed; respondent not entitled to compensation under the Act.
Judges
Smalberger, Hefer, Marais, Schutz, Zulman
Legal Topics
Workmen S Compensation Act, Scheduled Diseases, Retrospective Application, Occupational Asthma
Labour Law Workmen S Compensation Act Scheduled Diseases Retrospective Application Occupational Asthma

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Workmen's Compensation Commissioner

Appellant

Suzanna Jooste

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Full Bench of Cape of Good Hope Provincial Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the amendment to the Second Schedule of the Workmen's Compensation Act to include occupational asthma operated retrospectively.
  2. 2 Whether a person who ceased to be a workman before the amendment is entitled to compensation for occupational asthma contracted during employment.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the amendment to the Second Schedule of the Workmen's Compensation Act, which added occupational asthma as a scheduled disease, was not retrospective. The respondent ceased to be a workman before the amendment took effect on 1 January 1993. The requirements of section 89 were not satisfied, as the respondent was not a workman suffering from a scheduled disease at the relevant time. The Minister did not exercise the power to make the amendment retrospective, and the legislative intention was clear from the explicit wording of the Government Notice. The court found that any other interpretation would contradict the statutory scheme and the intention of...

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; respondent not entitled to compensation under the Act.

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed, with costs.
  • The order of the court a quo is set aside and substituted with: 'Appeal dismissed with costs.'