Christian v Colliers Properties (C323/2004) [2005] ZALC 56; (2005) 26 ILJ 234 (LC); [2005] 5 BLLR 479 (LC) (25 February 2005)

Christian v Colliers Properties (C323/2004) [2005] ZALC 56; (2005) 26 ILJ 234 (LC); [2005] 5 BLLR 479 (LC) (25 February 2005)

The applicant was dismissed because she refused to submit to the sexual advances of Mr Collier, the respondent's manager. There was no evidence of poor work performance prior to her refusal, and the subsequent complaints about her suitability were not credible. The dismissal was therefore automatically unfair under section 187(1)(f) of the Labour Relations Act. The applicant proved proper service of her statement of claim by fax. The court awarded the applicant the full 24 months' compensation provided for in section 194(3) of the Labour Relations Act, reflecting the punitive and deterrent intent of the legislature. Additionally, the court awarded R10,000 in damages under section 50(1)(e)...

Citation
[2005] ZALC 56
Parties
Applicant: Amarall Christian; Respondent: Colliers Properties
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 February 2005
Case Number
C323/2004
Procedural Posture
Labour Unfair Dismissal / Trial
Outcome
The applicant's dismissal was declared automatically unfair. The applicant was awarded 24 months' compensation and R10,000 in damages. Costs were awarded to the applicant.
Judges
A C Oosthuizen
Legal Topics
Automatically Unfair Dismissal, Sexual Harassment, Compensation, Damages, Employment Equity, Service by Fax
Labour Law Civil Procedure Automatically Unfair Dismissal Sexual Harassment Compensation Damages Employment Equity Service by Fax

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

Parties

Amarall Christian

Applicant

Colliers Properties

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Labour Unfair Dismissal / Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was the applicant's dismissal automatically unfair under section 187(1)(f) of the Labour Relations Act due to sexual harassment?
  2. 2 Did the applicant prove proper service of her statement of claim by fax under Rule 4(1)(iv)?
  3. 3 Is the applicant entitled to compensation under section 194 of the Labour Relations Act and damages under section 50(1)(e) of the Employment Equity Act?

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant was dismissed because she refused to submit to the sexual advances of Mr Collier, the respondent's manager. There was no evidence of poor work performance prior to her refusal, and the subsequent complaints about her suitability were not credible. The dismissal was therefore automatically unfair under section 187(1)(f) of the Labour Relations Act. The applicant proved proper service of her statement of claim by fax. The court awarded the applicant the full 24 months' compensation provided for in section 194(3) of the Labour Relations Act, reflecting the punitive and deterrent intent of the legislature. Additionally, the court awarded R10,000 in damages under section 50(1)(e)...

Court Disposition

The applicant's dismissal was declared automatically unfair. The applicant was awarded 24 months' compensation and R10,000 in damages. Costs were awarded to the applicant.

Orders

  • The respondent is ordered to pay the applicant compensation equivalent to 24 months' remuneration in terms of section 194(3) of the Labour Relations Act.
  • The respondent is ordered to pay the applicant R10,000 in damages in terms of section 50(1)(e) of the Employment Equity Act.