Solidarity obo Parkinson v Damelin (Pty) Ltd (JS72/17) [2018] ZALCJHB 458 (7 June 2018)

Solidarity obo Parkinson v Damelin (Pty) Ltd (JS72/17) [2018] ZALCJHB 458 (7 June 2018)

The court held that Mr Parkinson is entitled to back-pay for the period from 1 January 2014 to 2 December 2014 as per the reinstatement order. The obligation to pay back-pay flows directly from the order of reinstatement and is not contingent on the employee tendering his services or reporting for duty. The Constitutional Court authorities confirm that the right to back-pay arises from the judgment debt created by the reinstatement order, and the employee's subsequent resignation does not affect entitlement to remuneration for the period covered by the order. Damelin's argument that Mr Parkinson's failure to tender services or his current employment elsewhere precludes back-pay was...

Citation
[2018] ZALCJHB 458
Parties
Applicant: Solidarity obo SW Parkinson; Respondent: Damelin (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 June 2018
Case Number
JS72/17
Procedural Posture
Stated Case / Trial
Outcome
Mr Parkinson is entitled to back-pay for the period from 1 January 2014 to 2 December 2014 as per the reinstatement order.
Judges
Nkutha-Nkontwana
Legal Topics
Reinstatement, Back Pay, Unfair Dismissal, Remuneration, Judgment Debt
Labour Law Reinstatement Back Pay Unfair Dismissal Remuneration Judgment Debt

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Solidarity obo SW Parkinson

Applicant

Damelin (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Stated Case / Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Is Mr Parkinson entitled to back-pay for the period from 1 January 2014 to 2 December 2014 following his reinstatement?
  2. 2 Is the tender of services by Mr Parkinson a prerequisite for entitlement to back-pay under the reinstatement order?

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that Mr Parkinson is entitled to back-pay for the period from 1 January 2014 to 2 December 2014 as per the reinstatement order. The obligation to pay back-pay flows directly from the order of reinstatement and is not contingent on the employee tendering his services or reporting for duty. The Constitutional Court authorities confirm that the right to back-pay arises from the judgment debt created by the reinstatement order, and the employee's subsequent resignation does not affect entitlement to remuneration for the period covered by the order. Damelin's argument that Mr Parkinson's failure to tender services or his current employment elsewhere precludes back-pay was...

Court Disposition

Mr Parkinson is entitled to back-pay for the period from 1 January 2014 to 2 December 2014 as per the reinstatement order.

Orders

  • Mr Parkinson is entitled to back-pay for the period from 1 January 2014 to 2 December 2014.
  • The total back-pay due to Mr Parkinson is R385 000.00.