https://newsletter.po.creamermedia.com
Deepening Democracy through Access to Information
Home / Legal Briefs / All Legal Briefs RSS ← Back
Africa|Health
Africa|Health
africa|health
Close

Email this article

separate emails by commas, maximum limit of 4 addresses

Sponsored by

Close

Article Enquiry

South Africa: Disciplinary proceedings and medical certificates: A practical approach


Close

Embed Video

South Africa: Disciplinary proceedings and medical certificates: A practical approach

South Africa: Disciplinary proceedings and medical certificates: A practical approach

11th June 2025

ARTICLE ENQUIRY      SAVE THIS ARTICLE      EMAIL THIS ARTICLE

Font size: -+

The submission of medical certificates by employees facing disciplinary action is a recurring issue for employers. Employees often produce medical certificates booking them off for lengthy periods a few days before a disciplinary hearing is scheduled to proceed. This creates a conundrum for employers who are then required to grapple with the challenge of distinguishing between genuine cases of illness and attempts to delay or frustrate the disciplinary proceedings.

The status of medical certificates

Advertisement

Employers are under no obligation to accept medical certificates as valid justification for an employee not to attend a disciplinary hearing. Employers are entitled to scrutinise the validity of medical certificates, especially where there is a pattern of last-minute submissions or where the content of the certificate is vague or incomplete. In such cases, employers may request additional information, such as an affidavit from the medical practitioner, or require the practitioner to attend the hearing to provide oral evidence.  Employers may also reserve the right to refer the employee to a medical practitioner of their own choosing for an independent assessment at the company’s cost.

Rule 16 of the Ethical Rules of Conduct for Practitioners Registered under the Health Professions Act, 1974 provides that a valid medical certificate must contain, among other things, a description of the illness or condition in layman’s terms (with the patient’s consent) and must specify whether the employee is totally indisposed for duty or able to perform less strenuous tasks. If the patient does not consent to disclosure of the nature of the condition, the practitioner must at least state, based on examination, that the patient is unfit for work.

Advertisement

The Labour Appeal Court in the case of Mgobhozi v Naidoo NO & Others, confirmed that medical certificates amount to hearsay evidence. The court held that medical certificates should provide an explanation regarding the capacity of the employee to participate in disciplinary proceedings and that the doctor issuing the medical certificate must depose to an affidavit explaining why the employee will not be able to participate in the proceedings.  

The Supreme Court of Appeal in the case of Old Mutual v Gumbi, held that little evidential value could be attached to the medical certificate submitted by the employee ahead of his disciplinary hearing. The medical certificate did not reflect an independent medical diagnosis of the illness or an opinion as to the fitness of the employee to perform his normal work, let alone his fitness to attend a disciplinary hearing. The mere production of the medical certificate was found to be insufficient, in the circumstances of this case, to justify the employee’s absence from the hearing.

Concluding remarks

Employees facing disciplinary action must be mindful that the mere submission of a medical certificate does not automatically entitle them to a postponement of proceedings. They bear the responsibility to ensure that the certificate is comprehensive, fully setting out the extent of the employee’s incapacity, including their inability to participate in disciplinary proceedings where relevant, and, if challenged, to provide further evidence of their incapacity. Employees should also be aware that repeated or poorly substantiated requests for postponement may be viewed with suspicion and could undermine their credibility. 

Employers, on the other hand, need to strike a balance between ensuring that there are no undue delays and that the process followed is fair. In certain circumstances, employers may opt to conduct the disciplinary process by way of written submissions in order to circumvent what they may view as undue delays on the part of the employee.

Both employers and employees have defined roles to play in ensuring that medical certificates are used appropriately and that the integrity of the disciplinary process is maintained. 

 

Written by Sibusiso Dube, Partner at Bowmans

EMAIL THIS ARTICLE      SAVE THIS ARTICLE ARTICLE ENQUIRY

To subscribe email subscriptions@creamermedia.co.za or click here
To advertise email advertising@creamermedia.co.za or click here

Comment Guidelines

About

Polity.org.za is a product of Creamer Media.
www.creamermedia.co.za

Other Creamer Media Products include:
Engineering News
Mining Weekly
Research Channel Africa

Read more

Subscriptions

We offer a variety of subscriptions to our Magazine, Website, PDF Reports and our photo library.

Subscriptions are available via the Creamer Media Store.

View store

Advertise

Advertising on Polity.org.za is an effective way to build and consolidate a company's profile among clients and prospective clients. Email advertising@creamermedia.co.za

View options

Email Registration Success

Thank you, you have successfully subscribed to one or more of Creamer Media’s email newsletters. You should start receiving the email newsletters in due course.

Our email newsletters may land in your junk or spam folder. To prevent this, kindly add newsletters@creamermedia.co.za to your address book or safe sender list. If you experience any issues with the receipt of our email newsletters, please email subscriptions@creamermedia.co.za