Van Zyl and Another v Namibia Sales & Marketing CC (21 of 2017) [2017] NALCMD 28 (1 September 2017)

Van Zyl and Another v Namibia Sales & Marketing CC (21 of 2017) [2017] NALCMD 28 (1 September 2017)

The appellants voluntarily resigned due to financial difficulties and rumors of closure, not due to conduct by the respondent that rendered continued employment intolerable. There was no evidence of a disguised transfer of business or entitlement to Franke commission, incentives, or reimbursement. The appellants failed to discharge the onus of proof required for constructive dismissal or the claimed benefits.

Citation
[2017] NALCMD 28
Parties
1st Appellant: Hermie Van Zyl; 2nd Appellant: Thea Raath; Respondent: Namibia Sales & Marketing CC
Court
Labour Court Main Division
Jurisdiction
Namibia
Judgment Date
1 September 2017
Case Number
21 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Labour Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Arbitration
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Constructive Dismissal, Severance Pay, Transfer of Business, Onus of Proof, Employment Contract Terms
Source Language
English
Labour Law Constructive Dismissal Severance Pay Transfer of Business Onus of Proof Employment Contract Terms

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hermie Van Zyl

1st Appellant

Thea Raath

2nd Appellant

Namibia Sales & Marketing CC

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Labour Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Arbitration

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants were constructively dismissed by the respondent
  2. 2 Whether there was a disguised transfer of business to avoid statutory obligations
  3. 3 Whether appellants were entitled to Franke commission, incentives, and reimbursement of expenses

Ratio Decidendi

The appellants voluntarily resigned due to financial difficulties and rumors of closure, not due to conduct by the respondent that rendered continued employment intolerable. There was no evidence of a disguised transfer of business or entitlement to Franke commission, incentives, or reimbursement. The appellants failed to discharge the onus of proof required for constructive dismissal or the claimed benefits.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.