Board of Executors Ltd v McCafferty (442/97) [1999] ZASCA 90; [2000] 1 All SA 295 (A); 2000 (1) SA 848 (SCA) (29 November 1999)

Board of Executors Ltd v McCafferty (442/97) [1999] ZASCA 90; [2000] 1 All SA 295 (A); 2000 (1) SA 848 (SCA) (29 November 1999)

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the appellant, Board of Executors Ltd, was at least a co-employer of the respondent, Neil McCafferty, at the relevant time. The termination of the respondent's employment was effected by a letter written on the appellant's letterhead and signed by its group regional director, which indicated that the appellant exercised ultimate control over the respondent's employment within the group. The administrative arrangements, including salary payments and share option offers, further supported the inference that the appellant was an employer. The appellant's argument that its group structure precluded it from having employees was rejected, as the true...

Citation
[1999] ZASCA 90
Parties
Appellant: Board of Executors Ltd; Respondent: Neil McCafferty
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 November 1999
Case Number
442/97
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Appeal Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Mahomed, Grosskopf, Zulman, Streicher, Farlam
Legal Topics
Co Employment, Termination of Employment, Unfair Labour Practice, Retrenchment, Employer Definition
Labour Law Co Employment Termination of Employment Unfair Labour Practice Retrenchment Employer Definition

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

Parties

Board of Executors Ltd

Appellant

Neil McCafferty

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Appeal Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was the respondent employed by the appellant at the relevant time.
  2. 2 Did the appellant have the authority to terminate the respondent's employment within the group.
  3. 3 Is the appellant a co-employer of the respondent under the Labour Relations Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the appellant, Board of Executors Ltd, was at least a co-employer of the respondent, Neil McCafferty, at the relevant time. The termination of the respondent's employment was effected by a letter written on the appellant's letterhead and signed by its group regional director, which indicated that the appellant exercised ultimate control over the respondent's employment within the group. The administrative arrangements, including salary payments and share option offers, further supported the inference that the appellant was an employer. The appellant's argument that its group structure precluded it from having employees was rejected, as the true...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.