Legal updates and opinions
News / News
Banking on a resignation with immediate effect? Don’t count on it!
by Sandile July, Director and Lisa Appelgryn, Senior Associate: Labour & Employment Practice
- The Labour Appeal Court (“LAC“) in the matter of Standard Bank of South Africa Ltd v Nombulelo Chiloane (case no. JA85/18) has clarified the issue of the effect of a resignation with immediate effect in the midst of a pending disciplinary hearing.
- The Constitutional Court, in the matter of Steenkamp & Others v Edcon Ltd (National Union of Metalworkers of SA intervening) made the following statement obiter:
“Except where summary dismissal is warranted, the unilateral act of the employer in terminating the contract, whether by notice or other conduct, does not without more bring an end to the contract of employment. The same applies to an employee who gives short notice in violation of the contract: he or she may be obliged to serve out the notice period. In neither case does the unlawful repudiation of the contract have to be accepted by the other party“. - The LAC relies on this obiter dictum and concludes that if the contract provides for a notice period, the party that seeks to withdraw from the contract must give or serve the requisite notice. The provisions of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act No. 75 of 1997 (“BCEA“) will apply in circumstances where the contract of employment does not make provision for a notice period.
- In light of the above, an employee will not be able to escape the disciplinary process by tendering a resignation with immediate effect. The essence of the judgement is that there exists no such thing as resigning with immediate effect in the employment context, unless the employer waives the notice period. Notice must be served or given either in terms of the contract of employment or in terms of section 37 of BCEA.
Latest News
Automatically unfair dismissals versus legitimate dismissals for operational requirements: the importance of the ‘true reasons’ for the dismissal
By: Jacques van Wyk, Director, Andre van Heerden, Senior Associate and, Unathi Jukuda, Candidate Attorney ISSUE Whether, in dismissing employees, the [...]
Corroborative evidence is required to establish intoxication
By: Jacques van Wyk, Director, Andre van Heerden, Senior Associate and, Unathi Jukuda, Candidate Attorney ISSUE Whether an employer can dismiss [...]
The admissibility of evidence related to discussions held during a conciliation hearing
By Jacques van Wyk, Director and Yusha Davidson, Candidate Attorney ISSUE Can the Labour Court receive and rely on evidence [...]
Does a gross failure in procedure expose an employer to the risk of maximum permissible compensation even if there is a justification for the dismissal?
By Jacques van Wyk, Director and Yusha Davidson, Candidate Attorney ISSUE If a retrenchment was unavoidable, can the employer skimp [...]
#metooza – sexual harassment in the workplace in south africa
By Bradley Workman-Davies, Director and Megan Livingstone, Candidate Attorne Recently, and on an ongoing basis, revelations of sexual harassment in [...]
Do restraint of trade agreements survive a transfer of a business as a going concern?
By Jacques van Wyk, Director and Yusha Davidson, Candidate Attorney ISSUE Are restraint of trade agreements transferred in terms of [...]
