Bedderson v Sparrow Schools Education Trust (JS 70/07) [2009] ZALC 167; [2010] 4 BLLR 363 (LC); (2010) 31 ILJ 1325 (LC) (10 December 2009)

Bedderson v Sparrow Schools Education Trust (JS 70/07) [2009] ZALC 167; [2010] 4 BLLR 363 (LC); (2010) 31 ILJ 1325 (LC) (10 December 2009)

The court found that the applicant's dismissal was automatically unfair as it was based solely on her age, without an agreed or normal retirement age in her contract. The introduction of the retirement policy did not retrospectively alter her employment terms, and the respondent failed to justify the fairness of applying the policy to her unique circumstances. The respondent's operational justification was insufficient, as no evidence was led that accreditation would be lost if the applicant continued working. The dismissal also constituted unfair discrimination under section 6 of the Employment Equity Act. The applicant did not seek reinstatement and failed to quantify her loss, so the...

Citation
[2009] ZALC 167
Parties
Applicant: Joan Penelope Bedderson; Respondent: Sparrow Schools Education Trust
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 December 2009
Case Number
JS 70/07
Procedural Posture
Unfair Dismissal Application / Trial
Outcome
The applicant's dismissal was automatically unfair and constituted unfair discrimination. Compensation of six months' remuneration was awarded.
Judges
Le Roux
Legal Topics
Automatically Unfair Dismissal, Age Discrimination, Employment Equity Act, Retirement Policy, Compensation, Section 187 Lra
Labour Law Automatically Unfair Dismissal Age Discrimination Employment Equity Act Retirement Policy Compensation Section 187 Lra

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joan Penelope Bedderson

Applicant

Sparrow Schools Education Trust

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Unfair Dismissal Application / Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's dismissal was automatically unfair in terms of section 187(1)(f) of the Labour Relations Act due to age discrimination.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's retirement policy constituted unfair discrimination under section 6 of the Employment Equity Act.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's justification for dismissal was fair and lawful.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's dismissal was automatically unfair as it was based solely on her age, without an agreed or normal retirement age in her contract. The introduction of the retirement policy did not retrospectively alter her employment terms, and the respondent failed to justify the fairness of applying the policy to her unique circumstances. The respondent's operational justification was insufficient, as no evidence was led that accreditation would be lost if the applicant continued working. The dismissal also constituted unfair discrimination under section 6 of the Employment Equity Act. The applicant did not seek reinstatement and failed to quantify her loss, so the...

Court Disposition

The applicant's dismissal was automatically unfair and constituted unfair discrimination. Compensation of six months' remuneration was awarded.

Orders

  • The respondent is ordered to pay the applicant an amount of R42,000.00 within 14 days of the handing down of this order.
  • Each party is to pay its own costs.