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
The meaning of the term ‘pay back’ in a settlement agreement
Genrec Engineering (Pty) Ltd v Metal and Engineering Industries Bargaining Council and Others [2016] ZALCJHB 213 (17 June 2016) ISSUE [...]
The impact of Mitchell judgement on purchases of immovable property from an insolvent estate
In a recent judgement, of City Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality v PJ Mitchell (38/2015) (2015) ZASCA, the Supreme Court of Appeal ruled that [...]
Tread carefully when merging: tribunal imposes massive fine for failure to notify
In the intricate process of acquiring another business or forming a joint venture, firms often forget to check whether the [...]
The duty to disclose business rescue proceedings
On 14 April 2016, the Supreme Court of Appeal (“SCA”) in the matter of Umso Construction Proprietary Limited (“Umso”) v MEC [...]
Spotlight on boards and shareholder activism
INTRODUCTION Corporate activism places public pressure on boards to improve both financial and non-financial performance of companies. Non-financial performance [...]
New treatment of fractional entitlements in terms of the JSE listings requirements
A recent change to the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) Listings Requirements, which deals with the manner in which entitlements to [...]
