Judges Matter -

Enter your keyword

Suzanna Josephine Harvey

  • Home
  • Suzanna Josephine Harvey
Adv S J Harvey_4874

Capacity: Advocate
Gender: Female
Ethnicity: White
Date of Birth: January 1964
Qualifications: B.SC Engineering (Civil)(2001) (Wits), LLB (2008) LLM (2009) (UCT)

Key Judgments 

Candidate Bio | Updated April 2025

Advocate Suzanna Harvey has been a trailblazer in the labour law sector throughout her career.

Advocate Harvey first encountered the law as empowering while she was working for the GWU Aid Service, community advice office in Athlone while busy studying towards her Civil Engineering Degree. After working as a junior geotechnical engineer on-site for the Lesotho Highlands Project, Harvey was distressed by the lax safety standards.  This experience prompted her to help establish the Alexandra Workers Advice Office (AWAO) which supported a trade union of workers in small factories buffering Sandton. It was via this advice office that Harvey first started to represent the Alexandra residents at the Industrial Court in Pretoria.

Harvey’s was recognised for the work she was doing for AWAO and was recruited by the South African Commercial Catering and Allied Workers Union (SACCAWU) to work in the legal unit of the Wits Branch before working as a local organizer for the National Union of Mineworkers (NUMSA) between 1991 and 1994. During this period of informal legal training, Adv Harvey became part of the first cohort of CCMA Commissioners entrusted with the interpretation and application of the Labour Relations Act. While Harvey worked as a part-time Senior Commissioner until 2016, she completed her LLB and LLM degrees at UCT. After completing her pupillage she started practicing at the Cape Bar in 2011.

Advocate Harvey’s contributions to labour law are not limited by the work she has performed in different offices, but she has also academically contribute. In an SALJ published article titled ‘Labour brokers and workers’ rights: can they coexist in South Africa?’, Harvey argued that s198 of the LRA (which provides that workers procured by labour brokers are the employees of the brokers and not their clients) was potentially unconstitutional. Subsequent to the publishing of the article, the section was amended. Harvey was also a regular contributor to the weekly case law updates and editorials for IR Network (Lexis Nexis online updates).

Advocate Harvey’s passion for labour law is rooted in her belief that work is an important source of human identity, self-worth, and sense of value within family and community settings. She believes that her greatest contribution to the pursuit of justice in South Africa is by supporting access to justice for those who face barriers. In order to ensure that this type of work continues, she works with paralegals, NGO’s and young attorneys to inspire them and recognize the significance of labour law in the hope that they will continue to facilitate access to justice.

In the case of The City of Cape Town v Kotze and Another, Harvey AJ was asked in this application for self-review by the City to review, set aside and correct a decision which cleared a police officer of allegations of gross dishonesty. The employee was asked to attend a disciplinary hearing to answer allegations that she was grossly dishonest by claiming that she possessed a matric certificate on two occasions, when she did not. The chairperson of disciplinary hearing found that she was not guilty. The City brought the current application as a legality review of the chairperson’s decision under s 158(1)(h) of the LRA. This section provides the Labour Court with the power to review decisions taken by the state in its capacity as the employer. The City contended that the impugned decision was irrational on the basis of three different grounds.

The City requested that the court substitute the chairperson’s decision with a finding that the employee was grossly dishonest. With reliance on several cases, Harvey AJ confirmed that s158(1)(h) of the LRA does empower the Labour Court to review decisions taken by disciplinary bodies who are appointed by organs of state in their capacity as an employer. Thereafter, Harvey AJ set out the test for rationality in the employment context, and when applied to the facts found that the chairperson’s decision was irrational in relation to the reasons given for it, was disconnected from the evidence and was based on irrelevant considerations at the expense of relevant ones and fell to be set aside. Harvey AJ ordered that the allegations against the first respondent be remitted to the applicant for a disciplinary hearing de novo with directions aimed at ensuring that it is finalized within tight timeframes.

Advocate Harvey’s career illustrates a lifelong commitment to improving access to justice specifically for those seeking justice in the realm of labour law. As an advocate who appears often in both the Labour and Labour Appeal Courts and has extensive litigation experience in these matters, her next step is seeking appointment at the Labour Court where she can continue this line of work.

In April 2025 she will appear for the first time before the JSC.

April 2025 Interview

Adv Suzanna Josephine Harvey’s April 2025 interview for a position on the Labour court was unsuccessful. She was not nominated for appointment.