ABSA Investment Management Services (Pty) Ltd v Crowhurst (JA5/04) [2005] ZALAC 13; [2006] 2 BLLR 107 (LAC); (2006) 27 ILJ 107 (LAC) (11 November 2005)

ABSA Investment Management Services (Pty) Ltd v Crowhurst (JA5/04) [2005] ZALAC 13; [2006] 2 BLLR 107 (LAC); (2006) 27 ILJ 107 (LAC) (11 November 2005)

The court found on the balance of probabilities that Ms Crowhurst was not offered reassignment as required by Absa policy, and that the only practical option presented to her was retrenchment. The evidence indicated she was treated differently from other affected employees, and the failure of Mr Johnson to testify supported the inference that reassignment was not genuinely offered. The inappropriate language of the termination letter and lack of proper consultation further supported the respondent's version. Consequently, the court held that Ms Crowhurst was dismissed and that the dismissal was procedurally unfair due to the failure to offer reassignment. The compensation awarded by the...

Citation
[2005] ZALAC 13
Parties
Appellant: ABSA Investment Management Services (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Lisa Joy Crowhurst
Court
Labour Appeal Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 November 2005
Case Number
JA5/04
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Comrie, Nicholson, Mc Call
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Retrenchment, Reassignment Policy, Compensation, Onus of Proof
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Retrenchment Reassignment Policy Compensation Onus of Proof

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ABSA Investment Management Services (Pty) Ltd

Appellant

Lisa Joy Crowhurst

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was Ms Crowhurst dismissed or did she leave of her own accord?
  2. 2 Was the dismissal procedurally unfair due to failure to offer reassignment?
  3. 3 Is Ms Crowhurst entitled to compensation for unfair dismissal?

Ratio Decidendi

The court found on the balance of probabilities that Ms Crowhurst was not offered reassignment as required by Absa policy, and that the only practical option presented to her was retrenchment. The evidence indicated she was treated differently from other affected employees, and the failure of Mr Johnson to testify supported the inference that reassignment was not genuinely offered. The inappropriate language of the termination letter and lack of proper consultation further supported the respondent's version. Consequently, the court held that Ms Crowhurst was dismissed and that the dismissal was procedurally unfair due to the failure to offer reassignment. The compensation awarded by the...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The appellant is ordered to pay the costs of the appeal.