Mbabane – The Industrial Court has cleared the way for eight former Medisun Clinic employees to pursue their unfair dismissal case after dismissing most of the preliminary objections raised by the clinic.
In a ruling delivered on June 3, Judge Msimango found that the dispute should proceed to trial so that evidence can be led on contested issues surrounding the workers’ employment status and the circumstances of their departure from the clinic.
The case was brought by nine former employees who claim they were unfairly dismissed and are seeking various payments from Medisun Clinic.
The court, however, upheld one of the clinic’s objections and removed the ninth applicant, Colani Hlophe, from the proceedings. The judge found that Medisun Clinic had been wrongly cited as his employer because documents before the court did not clearly establish an employment relationship between him and the clinic.
Medisun had argued that Hlophe’s certificate of unresolved dispute also cited another entity, Ground Works, and failed to specify which employer had employed which worker. The court agreed that the clinic had no direct and substantial interest in Hlophe’s claim and upheld the point of misjoinder.
The clinic was unsuccessful on its remaining objections.
One of its arguments was that seven of the applicants were employed on fixed-term contracts and therefore could not rely on protections against unfair dismissal under Section 35 of the Employment Act. The former employees disputed this, maintaining that they had initially been employed on a permanent basis before their contracts were allegedly changed.
Judge Msimango held that the issue raised a dispute of fact that could not be resolved at the preliminary stage. The court ruled that evidence would have to be presented during a trial before a determination could be made.
Medisun also challenged the workers’ decision to pursue the matter collectively, arguing that Eswatini law does not recognise class actions for unfair dismissal claims and that the claims should be separated.
The court rejected that argument, stating that Section 85(2) of the Industrial Relations Act does not prevent employees from bringing a collective case against an employer. The judge noted that the Industrial Court has previously dealt with collective employee actions and has authority to consolidate claims involving the same employer and related issues.
Another objection by the clinic was that the workers had failed to provide sufficient details in their pleadings regarding their contracts of employment and claims for overtime and public holiday payments.
The court dismissed that challenge, finding that the pleadings contained enough information to enable the employer to respond and that any further disputes could be addressed during the trial process.
As a result, the matter will proceed to trial, where the remaining eight applicants and Medisun Clinic are expected to present evidence on the unfair dismissal claims.
Discussion about this post