Atholhurst School v Koorts N.O. (JR 1482/01) [2002] ZALC 66; (2002) 23 ILJ 2052 (LC) (8 August 2002)

Atholhurst School v Koorts N.O. (JR 1482/01) [2002] ZALC 66; (2002) 23 ILJ 2052 (LC) (8 August 2002)

The court found that the third respondent was employed on probation, not a fixed term contract, and her termination constituted a dismissal. The arbitrator correctly found the dismissal to be both procedurally and substantively unfair. However, the arbitrator failed to properly exercise discretion before awarding compensation and did not consider relevant factors such as the short duration of employment and the school's non-profit status. The compensation awarded was disproportionate to the harm suffered. The court set aside the compensation award and substituted it with an order for payment of two weeks' notice pay, as required by the BCEA.

Citation
[2002] ZALC 66
Parties
Applicant: Atholhurst School; Respondent: Koorts, ME N.O.; Respondent: CCMA; Respondent: Berger, Teresa
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 August 2002
Case Number
JR 1482/01
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
The compensation award made by the arbitrator is reviewed and set aside. The applicant is ordered to pay the third respondent two weeks' notice pay. No order as to costs.
Judges
Maserumule AJ
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Compensation Award, Probation Period, Notice Pay, Review of Arbitration Award
Labour Law Unfair Dismissal Compensation Award Probation Period Notice Pay Review of Arbitration Award

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 5 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Atholhurst School

Applicant

Koorts, ME N.O.

Respondent

CCMA

Respondent

Berger, Teresa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the third respondent was dismissed or her fixed term contract expired.
  2. 2 Whether the dismissal was procedurally and substantively unfair.
  3. 3 Whether the compensation awarded by the arbitrator was appropriate and proportionate.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the third respondent was employed on probation, not a fixed term contract, and her termination constituted a dismissal. The arbitrator correctly found the dismissal to be both procedurally and substantively unfair. However, the arbitrator failed to properly exercise discretion before awarding compensation and did not consider relevant factors such as the short duration of employment and the school's non-profit status. The compensation awarded was disproportionate to the harm suffered. The court set aside the compensation award and substituted it with an order for payment of two weeks' notice pay, as required by the BCEA.

Court Disposition

The compensation award made by the arbitrator is reviewed and set aside. The applicant is ordered to pay the third respondent two weeks' notice pay. No order as to costs.

Orders

  • The award ordering the applicant to pay R17,500 compensation is reviewed and set aside.
  • The applicant must pay the third respondent two weeks' notice pay in the amount of R1,750.