Juta's Business Law - Volume 15, Issue 4, 2007
Volume 15, Issue 4, 2007
Author Marie McGregorSource: Juta's Business Law 15 (2007)More Less
In this article I shall discuss certain terms used in the Protected Disclosures Act 26 of 2000 (the 'PDA') and the recent decision in Tshishonga v Minister of Justice & Constitutional Development & another  4 BLLR 327 (LC), which dealt with the legal position of an employee who makes a general protected disclosure.
The PDA provides that no employee may be subjected to any occupational detriment by his or her employer on account of, or partly on account of, having made a protected disclosure' (s 3). The PDA must be read with section 186(2)(d) of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 (the 'LRA'). It states that an 'occupational detriment' (other than a dismissal) suffered by an employee on account of having made a protected disclosure constitutes an unfair labour practice.
Source: Juta's Business Law 15, pp 171 –176 (2007)More Less
The new flavour of the moment in insurance litigation is the doctrine of subrogation. The intricacies surrounding the insurer's right of subrogation seem to come under judicial scrutiny more often than any other single topic, even those perennial favourites misrepresentation and non-disclosure.
Source: Juta's Business Law 15, pp 177 –179 (2007)More Less