Chevron Engineering (Pty) Ltd v Nkambule, Joseph and 23 Others

Chevron Engineering (Pty) Ltd dismissed Joseph Nkambule and 23 other employees in March 1995 following their participation in an illegal strike. The Industrial Court ordered their reinstatement with effect from the date of dismissal. Chevron appealed to the Labour Appeal Court (LAC), which dismissed the appeal. Chevron then sought leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA). The LAC refused leave, holding that in terms of item 22(6) of Schedule 7 to the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995, no appeal lay from an LAC decision in appeals originating from the Industrial Court. Chevron approached the SCA seeking leave to appeal, or alternatively directions for the prosecution of an appeal, arguing that section 168(3) of the Constitution permitted an appeal notwithstanding item 22(6).

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that Chevron Engineering is entitled to appeal to the SCA against the LAC judgment without leave. Directions were issued for compliance with Rule 10 of the SCA Rules for the further prosecution of the appeal. The costs of the application before the SCA were ordered to be costs in the cause of the appeal.

This judgment clarifies the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of Appeal over decisions of the Labour Appeal Court in transitional matters arising from the repeal of the Labour Relations Act 28 of 1956. It affirms the constitutional supremacy of section 168(3) and establishes that statutory provisions purporting to exclude appeals must be read subject to the Constitution. The case is important for confirming that certain LAC decisions are appealable to the SCA and that no leave is required, thereby correcting earlier authority decided per incuriam.