Wyeth SA (Pty) Limited v Manqele and Others (JR 850/01) [2003] ZALC 60; [2003] 7 BLLR 734 (LC) (26 May 2003)

Wyeth SA (Pty) Limited v Manqele and Others (JR 850/01) [2003] ZALC 60; [2003] 7 BLLR 734 (LC) (26 May 2003)

The court found that the process followed in the CCMA was consistent with the parties' agreement and did not amount to an irregularity or prejudice against the applicant. Regarding the definition of 'employee', the court held that a person who is party to a valid and binding contract of employment is an employee for...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2003] ZALC 60
Parties
Applicant: Wyeth SA (Pty) Limited; Respondent: Manqele, T; Respondent: Moletsane, R N.O.; Respondent: The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Security, Retail, Transport and Allied Workers Union of South Africa
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 May 2003
Case Number
JR 850/01
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of CCMA Ruling
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
A Van Niekerk
Legal Topics
Definition of Employee, Unfair Dismissal, Contract of Employment, Jurisdiction of Ccma
Labour Law Definition of Employee Unfair Dismissal Contract of Employment Jurisdiction of Ccma

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wyeth SA (Pty) Limited

Applicant

Manqele, T

Respondent

Moletsane, R N.O.

Respondent

The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Security, Retail, Transport and Allied Workers Union of South Africa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of CCMA Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether it was irregular for a different commissioner to make a ruling after another had heard oral submissions.
  2. 2 Whether a person who has concluded a contract of employment but has not commenced work is an 'employee' under section 213 of the LRA.
  3. 3 Whether the CCMA had jurisdiction to hear the unfair dismissal dispute.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the process followed in the CCMA was consistent with the parties' agreement and did not amount to an irregularity or prejudice against the applicant. Regarding the definition of 'employee', the court held that a person who is party to a valid and binding contract of employment is an employee for the purposes of the LRA, even if employment has not yet commenced. The statutory protection of employment rights and the constitutional right to fair labour practices support a purposive interpretation that includes persons contracted to work. The application for review was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.