For subscribers only
Whilst some judgment summaries are available to all, this judgment summary is reserved for subscribers only.
If you are already a subscriber, you can login to see this judgment summary. If you cannot login, email us and we’ll arrange to give you access.
You can subscribe by paying a reasonable monthly fee. You can cancel at any time. No fixed contracts.
Subscribe
You can read a summary of a landmark judgment to see what a judgment summary looks like.
We provide free access to landmark judgments.
You can also read more about Gilesfiles and who subscribes to GilesFiles and why.
When the issue first surfaced when the provincial government failed to pay the allowance, Coetzee and other professors at Stellenbosch referred the dispute to the bargaining council, which dismissed the referral on the grounds that the council did not have jurisdiction, because the claimants were employed by the university and not by the department of health.
“Unbowed, the doctors then took their claim to the Labour Court which decided that they were indeed entitled to the allowance. The provincial government then took the matter to the Labour Appeal Court where three judges agreed with the lower court that the respondents were indeed entitled to the allowance.
It was then that the MEC took the matter to the Constitutional Court where it will be heard on November 14.”