Case Law[2024] ZAGPJHC 315South Africa
Motsoeneng v Gauteng Department of Health (2023-77447) [2024] ZAGPJHC 315 (27 March 2024)
High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)
27 March 2024
Headnotes
Summary
Judgment
begin wrapper
begin container
begin header
begin slogan-floater
end slogan-floater
- About SAFLII
About SAFLII
- Databases
Databases
- Search
Search
- Terms of Use
Terms of Use
- RSS Feeds
RSS Feeds
end header
begin main
begin center
# South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
You are here:
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
>>
2024
>>
[2024] ZAGPJHC 315
|
Noteup
|
LawCite
sino index
## Motsoeneng v Gauteng Department of Health (2023-77447) [2024] ZAGPJHC 315 (27 March 2024)
Motsoeneng v Gauteng Department of Health (2023-77447) [2024] ZAGPJHC 315 (27 March 2024)
Download original files
PDF format
RTF format
make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPJHC/Data/2024_315.html
sino date 27 March 2024
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA,
GAUTENG
DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
CASE
NO: 2023 – 77447
1.
REPORTABLE: NO
2.
OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO
In
the application by
MOTSOENENG, RAHAB
MATSETSA Applicant
And
GAUTENG DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH Respondent
in re
the
matter between
MOTSOENENG, RAHAB
MATSETSA Applicant
And
VAAL UNIVERSITY OF
TECHNOLOGY First
Respondent
SOUTH AFRICAN NURSING
COUNCIL Second
Respondent
GAUTENG DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH Third
Respondent
JUDGEMENT
MOORCROFT
AJ:
Summary
Urgent application to
extend interim order made on 17 August 2023 – order not
extended as the period of community service
in the order has been
completed
Exclusive jurisdiction
of Labour Court –
section 157
of the
Labour Relations Act 66 of
1995
Order
[1]
In this matter I make the following order:
1.
The
application is dismissed;
2.
The
applicant is ordered to pay the costs of the application.
[2]
The reasons for the order follow below.
[3]
This is a judgement in the urgent court. The applicant seeks an order
that a previous order of this court granted on 17
August 2023 by
Crutchfield J be extended to allow the applicant to be employed as a
professional nurse by the respondent pending
the finalisation of a
review application between the applicant, the Vaal University of
Technology, the South African Nursing Council,
and the Gauteng
Department of Health. The applicant also seeks an order that pending
the final determination of the review, the
respondent be directed to
reinstate the applicant to her employment in the capacity of
professional nurse with the employment conditions
common to such
employment.
In
terms of the order made on 17 August 2023 the main application (part
B) was postponed
sine die
, the costs were reserved, and it was
ordered that pending the final determination of the main application
the Gauteng Department
of Health (then the third respondent, now the
only respondent in this application) was directed to permit the
applicant to continue
with her one-year community service in the
capacity of professional nurse.
[4]
It is common cause that the respondent complied with this order and
that the one-year community service expired at the
end of December
2023, and that the applicant continued to work for the respondent in
January and February 2024. She was paid a
salary but her full-time
employment was not formalised. There is a dispute about whether the
salary was paid in full.
[5]
The community service cannot be extended and the order of 17 August
2023 can therefore similarly not be extended.
The
applicant knew that the order of 17 August 2023 would lapse and did
lapse at the end of December 2023 and if so advised should
have
approached the court in the ordinary course for an order.. When the
order was granted in August 2023 it was clearly envisaged
that it
would be a short - term order and would terminate at the end of the
one-year community service that commenced in January
2023.
[6]
The respondent has now terminated the services of the applicant,
hence this application. There are disputes and questions
have been
raised about the academic qualifications of the applicant The
respondent is reticent to employ her pending the final
determination
of her academic qualifications and the question whether she qualifies
for appointment. As indicated below the
dispute about the
employment status of the applicant is a matter to be resolved before
the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation
and Arbitration and the
Labour Court.
[7]
It is not possible for this court to find that the applicant is
indeed a professional nurse or entitled to registration
as such by
the South African Nursing Council. The parties entitled and to
determine her academic status, her qualifications and
her compliance
with registration requirements are the second and third respondents
in the main application, the Vaal University
of Technology and the
Gauteng Department of Health. These parties have a direct interest in
any application to reinstate the applicant
to the position of
professional nurse and the failure to join them to this application
constitutes, in my view, a non-joinder.
[8] The present
dispute falls foursquare within the ambit of the
Labour Relations Act
66 of 1995
.
Section 157
(1) and (2) of the
Labour Relations Act 66 of
1995
reads as follows:
157
Jurisdiction of Labour Court
(1)
Subject to the Constitution and section 173, and except where this
Act provides otherwise, the Labour Court has exclusive
jurisdiction in respect of all matters that elsewhere in terms
of this Act or in terms of any other law are to be
determined
by the Labour Court.
(2)
The Labour Court has concurrent jurisdiction with the High Court in
respect of any alleged or threatened violation of any fundamental
right entrenched in Chapter 2 of the Constitution of the Republic of
South Africa, 1996, and arising from-
(a) employment
and from labour relations;
(b) any dispute over
the constitutionality of any executive or administrative act or
conduct, or any
threatened executive or administrative act or
conduct, by the State in its capacity as an employer; and
(c) the
application of any law for the administration of which
the Minister is responsible.
[9]
The orders
sought by the applicant in this urgent application
[1]
are aimed at reinstating the applicant as an employee in the capacity
of a professional nurse.. The
Labour Relations Act contains
extensive
provisions that govern legal aspects of the employer/employee
relationship, such as a guarantee of freedom of association,
[2]
collective bargaining,
[3]
and,
most importantly in the present matter, dispute resolution.
[4]
The
Act provides for the establishment of the Commission for
Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA)
[5]
and the Labour Court.
[6]
The
applicant has the machinery created by the Labourt Relations Act at
her disposal to deal with unfair dismissal disputes before
the CCMA.
This is not the matter for the High Court to pronounce upon as the
CCMA was created specifically to deal with labour
- related disputes
and the Labour Court has jurisdiction in terms of
section 157
(1) of
the
Labour Relations Act.
[10
]
I find, on the assumption in favour of the applicant that this Court
does enjoy jurisdiction, that the application is not
urgent, that
even on the applicant’s papers no case is made out for any
extension of the order of 17 August 2023, and
that the
applicant is not entitled to reinstatement as a
professional nurse.
[11] For the
reasons as set out above I make the order in paragraph 1.
MOORCROFT
AJ
ACTING
JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG
DIVISION
JOHANNESBURG
Electronically
submitted
Delivered:
This judgement was prepared and authored by the Acting Judge whose
name is reflected and is handed down electronically
by circulation to
the Parties / their legal representatives by email and by uploading
it to the electronic file of this matter
on CaseLines. The date of
the judgment is deemed to be
27 March 2024
COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT
: N A MOHOMANE
INSTRUCTED
BY: DIBUSENG
LEHOKO HLONI
LEHOKO
ATTORNEYS
COUNSEL FOR THE
RESPONDENT: T MLAMBO
INSTRUCTED
BY: MBA
INC
DATE OF
ARGUMENT: 26
MARCH 2024
DATE OF
JUDGMENT: 27
MARCH 2024
[1]
The
review application is not before me and this judgment does not
pronounce on or affect the review application.
[2]
Chapter II.
[3]
Chapter III.
[4]
Chapter VII.
[5]
Section 112.
[6]
Section 151.
sino noindex
make_database footer start
Similar Cases
Motsoeneng v South African Broadcasting Corporation SOC Limited and Others (2017/ 29163) [2022] ZAGPJHC 528 (15 July 2022)
[2022] ZAGPJHC 528High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)100% similar
Motloung and Another v Minister of Police and Another (2016/6107) [2024] ZAGPJHC 435 (3 May 2024)
[2024] ZAGPJHC 435High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)99% similar
Maphatsoe and Others v Erasmus and Others (2021/18447) [2023] ZAGPJHC 214 (9 March 2023)
[2023] ZAGPJHC 214High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)99% similar
Mogomotsi v Mogale City Local Municipality (A2024-140407) [2025] ZAGPJHC 1218 (24 November 2025)
[2025] ZAGPJHC 1218High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)99% similar
Motloung v Road Accident Fund (003034/2019) [2025] ZAGPJHC 371 (12 March 2025)
[2025] ZAGPJHC 371High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)99% similar