Hill v CCMA and Others (C789/14) [2015] ZALCCT 71 (9 December 2015)

Hill v CCMA and Others (C789/14) [2015] ZALCCT 71 (9 December 2015)

The court found that the applicant had voluntarily resigned under the terms of a clear and unambiguous settlement agreement, which constituted a full and final compromise of all disputes with the University. The applicant's attempt to cancel the agreement on the day her resignation became effective did not revive her original employment contract or amount to a dismissal. The arguments advanced by the applicant relied on inconsistent contractual remedies and failed to establish any basis for rescission or constructive dismissal. The agreement did not convert her employment into a fixed term contract with a reasonable expectation of renewal, as any future employment was contingent on the...

Citation
[2015] ZALCCT 71
Parties
Applicant: Lauren Hill; Respondent: CCMA; Respondent: Z. Madotyeni N.O.; Respondent: University of Cape Town
Court
Labour Court Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
9 December 2015
Case Number
C789/14
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Opposed Review of CCMA Arbitration Award
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
Rabkin-Naicker
Legal Topics
Dismissal, Settlement Agreement, Fixed Term Contract, Reasonable Expectation of Renewal, Jurisdictional Review
Labour Law Civil Procedure Dismissal Settlement Agreement Fixed Term Contract Reasonable Expectation of Renewal Jurisdictional Review

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lauren Hill

Applicant

CCMA

Respondent

Z. Madotyeni N.O.

Respondent

University of Cape Town

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Opposed Review of CCMA Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was dismissed by the University of Cape Town or resigned voluntarily under the settlement agreement.
  2. 2 Whether the cancellation of the settlement agreement by the applicant constituted a dismissal.
  3. 3 Whether the settlement agreement converted the employment contract into a fixed term contract with a reasonable expectation of renewal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had voluntarily resigned under the terms of a clear and unambiguous settlement agreement, which constituted a full and final compromise of all disputes with the University. The applicant's attempt to cancel the agreement on the day her resignation became effective did not revive her original employment contract or amount to a dismissal. The arguments advanced by the applicant relied on inconsistent contractual remedies and failed to establish any basis for rescission or constructive dismissal. The agreement did not convert her employment into a fixed term contract with a reasonable expectation of renewal, as any future employment was contingent on the...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.