Charlton v Parliament of the Republic of South Africa

Harry Mathew Charlton was employed as the Chief Financial Officer of Parliament. During his tenure, he investigated and reported large-scale fraud relating to Members of Parliament’s travel benefits, commonly known as the ‘Travelgate scandal’. He alleged that after senior management and political changes following the 2004 elections, Parliament’s support for these investigations declined and attempts to pursue further fraud were frustrated. Charlton was suspended without a prior hearing in November 2005, subjected to a disciplinary enquiry in December 2005, and dismissed in January 2006 for alleged misconduct. He contended that his dismissal was in fact due to his whistleblowing activities. In the Labour Court, he advanced multiple causes of action, including automatically unfair dismissal under the Labour Relations Act (LRA) and ordinary unfair dismissal. Parliament raised exceptions to his statement of claim, which the Labour Court dismissed. Parliament appealed to the Labour Appeal Court, which upheld the exceptions and referred parts of the dispute to arbitration. Charlton then appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was upheld with costs. The order of the Labour Appeal Court was set aside and replaced with an order striking Parliament’s appeal from the roll with costs, including the costs of two counsel.

The case is significant for restating and confirming the principles governing the appealability of interlocutory decisions, particularly the dismissal of exceptions. It clarifies that these principles apply equally in the Labour Court and Labour Appeal Court, promoting procedural certainty and preventing piecemeal appeals in labour litigation.