Globalisation, the Development of Constitutionalism and the Individual Employee
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2007/v10i2a2805Abstract
To establish which legal system will govern the relationship between parties involved in an international employment contract, the rules of private international law (or conflict of laws) must be applied. Each country has its own rules of private international law and each country’s courts will apply its own rules if the court is seized with a matter that involves foreign elements. There may be conflict between the potentially applicable legal systems of countries in terms of the level of protection afforded to employees who are parties to international employment contracts.
South Africa has constitutionalised the right to fair labour practices and the question is whether this right is applicable to South African employees working in other countries, or to foreigners working in South Africa who originate from countries where this right is not protected. The answer to this question is to be found in the influence of the Constitution on the rules of private international law as applied by South African courts.
It is evident from recent judgments of the Labour Court that the Court will readily assume jurisdiction and will furthermore readily hold that the proper law of the contract is South African law in order to protect the constitutional rights of employees involved in international employment contracts.
Had the Labour Court held that the place of performance was still the decisive connecting factor, (as previously decided in most South African cases on this
aspect) the law of the other countries involved in the international employment relationship could have left employees in a worse position than under South African law. This possibility seems to be one of the important underlying reasons for the Labour Court’s willingness to assume jurisdiction and to hold that the proper law was in fact South African law.
In the globalisation context the Labour Court has contributed to the advancement of constitutionalism by developing South Africa’s common law rules of private international law to afford constitutional protection to employees involved in international employment contracts.
Downloads
References
Bibliography
Anon Sunday Times 1
Anonymous “South Africans feared dead in jet crash” Sunday Times 6 May 2007 1
Cachalia et al Fundamental Rights 3
Cachalia A et al Fundamental Rights in the New Constitution (Juta Cape Town 1994)
Calitz 2000 South African Journal of Economics
Calitz E "Fiscal implications of the economic globalisation of South Africa"
68 (4) South African Journal of Economics 564-606
Currie and De Waal New Constitutional & Administrative Law
Currie I and De Waal J (eds) The New Constitutional & Administrative Law Vol 1 (Juta Landsdowne 2001)
Dicey and Morris Conflict of Laws
Dicey AV and Morris JHC (eds) The Conflict of Laws 13th ed (Sweet & Maxwell London 2000)
Forsyth Private International Law
Forsyth C Private International Law 4th ed (Juta Cape Town 2003)
Fredericks 2006 SA Merc LJ 80
Fredericks EA "The Proper Law of the International Contract of
Employment" 2006 18 SA Merc LJ 75-80
Roodt 2003 SA Merc LJ 135
Roodt C "Jurisdiction in the South African Labour Court: Employer Identity" 2003 15 SA Merc LJ 135-149
Van Rooyen Kontrak
Van Rooyen J Die Kontrak in die Suid-Afrikaanse Internasionale Privaatreg (Juta Cape Town 1972)
Register of Legislation
Basic Conditions of Employment Act 75 of 1997
Constitution of the Republic of South 1996
Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998
Foreign States Immunity Act 87 of 1981
Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995
Labour Relations Act 28 of 1956
Register of cases
American Flag plc v Great African T-shirt Corporation 2000 (1) SA 356 (W)
August Läpple (South Africa) v Jarret & others [2003] 12 BLLR 1194 (LC) Bisonboard v Braun Woodworking Machinery 1999 (1) SA 482 (A)
Chemical & Industrial Workers Union v Sopelog CC (1993) 14 ILJ
DeGeorges and Safari Club International (2002) 23 ILJ 952 (CCMA)
Estate Agents Board v Lek 1979 (3) SA 1048 (A)
Genrec Mei v ICISEMI & others [1995] 4 BLLR 1 (AD)
ISM Inter v Maraldo & Another 1983 (4) SA 112 (T)
Kleynhans v Parmalat [2002] 9 BLLR 879 (LC)
Laconian Maritime Enterprises Ltd v Agromar Lineas Ltd 1986 (3) SA 509 (D)
Laurens v Von Höhne 1993 (2) SA 104 (W)
Moslemany v Lever Brothers (2006) 27 ILJ 2656 (LC)
NK v Minister of Safety and Security (2005) 26 ILJ 1205 (CC)
Nobela v Consulate General USA [1999] 1 BLLR 31 (LC)
Parry v Astral [2005] 10 BLLR 989 (LC)
Pretorius v Pretorius 1948 (4) SA 144 (O)
Standard Bank of South Africa v Efroiken and Newman 1924 AD 171
Trythall v Sandoz (1994) 15 ILJ 661 (IC)
Veneta Mineraria Spa v Carolina Collieries 1987 (4) SA 883 (A)
Werner/Capital Contracting Services [2005] 1 BALR 138 (CCMA)
Register of Conventions
Rome Convention on the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations, 1980
Register of Internet resources
Waluchow 2007 http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/constitutionalism/ 7 May
Waluchow W 2007 "Constitutionalism" Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy [Found on internet]
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/constitutionalism/ [Date of use 7 May 2007]
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2017 K Calitz
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.