Inama v Raydian (Pty) Ltd (JS718/2023) [2025] ZALCJHB 219 (13 June 2025)

Inama v Raydian (Pty) Ltd (JS718/2023) [2025] ZALCJHB 219 (13 June 2025)

The applicant's conduct and written communication on 18 August 2023 demonstrated a clear and unambiguous intention to terminate her employment prior to the expiry of the notice period. By revoking her notice period and ceasing to work, she effectively resigned before the date of dismissal as contemplated in the retrenchment letter. The court found that the applicant was not dismissed by the respondent but resigned of her own accord, and therefore her claim for unfair dismissal could not succeed. The special plea was upheld and the applicant's claim dismissed.

Citation
[2025] ZALCJHB 219
Parties
Applicant: Inama Cindy Lorren; Respondent: Raydian (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 June 2025
Case Number
JS718/2023
Procedural Posture
Special Plea / Trial Judgment
Outcome
Applicant's claim dismissed; special plea upheld; no order as to costs.
Judges
W Kruger
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Resignation, Retrenchment, Notice Period, Compensation, Costs
Labour Law Unfair Dismissal Resignation Retrenchment Notice Period Compensation Costs

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Inama Cindy Lorren

Applicant

Raydian (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Special Plea / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was dismissed or resigned prior to the expiry of the notice period.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to relief for unfair dismissal under the Labour Relations Act.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's conduct constituted a resignation during the notice period.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's conduct and written communication on 18 August 2023 demonstrated a clear and unambiguous intention to terminate her employment prior to the expiry of the notice period. By revoking her notice period and ceasing to work, she effectively resigned before the date of dismissal as contemplated in the retrenchment letter. The court found that the applicant was not dismissed by the respondent but resigned of her own accord, and therefore her claim for unfair dismissal could not succeed. The special plea was upheld and the applicant's claim dismissed.

Court Disposition

Applicant's claim dismissed; special plea upheld; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The special plea is upheld.
  • The applicant's claim is dismissed.