McMahon v BDFM Publishers (Pty) Ltd (PS53/17) [2019] ZAECPEHC 43 (5 July 2019)

McMahon v BDFM Publishers (Pty) Ltd (PS53/17) [2019] ZAECPEHC 43 (5 July 2019)

The court found that the applicant was unfairly discriminated against on the basis of her disability. The evidence established that she was denied annual salary increases for 2010, 2011, and 2012, which were granted to other employees based on inflation, and that the only reason for the denial was her disability. The respondent failed to provide a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason or to justify the fairness of its conduct. Furthermore, the respondent did not reasonably accommodate the applicant's disability, refusing her request to work from home without valid justification, while other employees were permitted such arrangements. The respondent's conduct forced the applicant out of...

Citation
[2019] ZAECPEHC 43
Parties
Applicant: Jenny McMahon; Respondent: BDFM Publishers (Pty) Ltd
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 July 2019
Case Number
PS53/17
Procedural Posture
Labour Discrimination Application / Trial Judgment
Outcome
The applicant succeeded on her claims of unfair discrimination and failure to reasonably accommodate her disability. Her claim for underpayment of temporary disability benefits was dismissed.
Judges
Lallie
Legal Topics
Unfair Discrimination, Reasonable Accommodation, Employment Equity Act, Remuneration Increases, Compensation for Unfair Discrimination
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Discrimination Reasonable Accommodation Employment Equity Act Remuneration Increases Compensation for Unfair Discrimination

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

Parties

Jenny McMahon

Applicant

BDFM Publishers (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Labour Discrimination Application / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was discriminated against on the basis of her disability regarding remuneration increases for 2010, 2011, and 2012.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant suffered mental and emotional anguish due to alleged denial of annual increases, pressure to return to work, pressure to work a full day under threat of financial penalty, and lack of reasonable accommodation.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent failed to pay the applicant the correct temporary disability benefits.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant was unfairly discriminated against on the basis of her disability. The evidence established that she was denied annual salary increases for 2010, 2011, and 2012, which were granted to other employees based on inflation, and that the only reason for the denial was her disability. The respondent failed to provide a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason or to justify the fairness of its conduct. Furthermore, the respondent did not reasonably accommodate the applicant's disability, refusing her request to work from home without valid justification, while other employees were permitted such arrangements. The respondent's conduct forced the applicant out of...

Court Disposition

The applicant succeeded on her claims of unfair discrimination and failure to reasonably accommodate her disability. Her claim for underpayment of temporary disability benefits was dismissed.

Orders

  • The respondent discriminated against the applicant on the basis of her disability.
  • The respondent is ordered to pay the applicant compensation equivalent to twenty-four months' remuneration (R495,212.36 per annum multiplied by two, equalling R990,426.72) plus the remuneration increases granted by the respondent in April 2010, 2011, and 2012 compounded and multiplied by 24.