Navigation
Cases

H. Charlton and Parliament of the Republic of South Africa(2007)(LC)

The applicant disclosed information regarding improper travel benefits claimed by Members of Parliament.  The employer argued that MPs are neither the employer of the applicant nor the employees of the respondent and therefore the disclosures were not protected in terms of the protected Disclosures Act.  An important aspect to this case is that the court found that the definition of employee in the PDA is wider than the definition in the Labour Relations Act and that Parliament does have business which is to legislate for the Republic of South Africa and MPs perform duties for Parliament, being an organ of the State. The court held that MPs were both employees and employers. 


Read More »
SEARCH
Legislation & Guidelines - Whistleblowing

Select a file:

If this document cannot be opened, please click on Save instead of Open in the File download pop-up menu that appears after the file has been selected.