Walker v Rainbow Farms (Pty) Limited and Others (DA31/2001) [2002] ZALAC 26 (6 December 2002)

Walker v Rainbow Farms (Pty) Limited and Others (DA31/2001) [2002] ZALAC 26 (6 December 2002)

The court found that the appellant was aware, both before and after his retirement, that any further employment would be temporary and subject to the employer's specific needs. The evidence showed that the appellant was offered fixed term contracts, which he refused to sign, and that he was repeatedly informed that his continued employment would not be indefinite. The court held that there was no consensus between the parties for an indefinite contract, and the circumstances did not support the application of the doctrine of tacit relocation. The employment relationship was extended only until 29 February 2000, at which point it was properly terminated. The appeal was dismissed as the...

Citation
[2002] ZALAC 26
Parties
Appellant: Peter William Walker; Respondent: Rainbow Farms (Pty) Limited; Respondent: The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Commissioner L Mahlangu; Respondent: Commissioner B Purdon
Court
Labour Appeal Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
6 December 2002
Case Number
DA31/2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.
Judges
Davis, Zondo, Du Plessis
Legal Topics
Termination of Employment, Fixed Term Contracts, Tacit Relocation, Unfair Dismissal
Labour Law Termination of Employment Fixed Term Contracts Tacit Relocation Unfair Dismissal

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter William Walker

Appellant

Rainbow Farms (Pty) Limited

Respondent

The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Commissioner L Mahlangu

Respondent

Commissioner B Purdon

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant's employment after retirement was governed by a new indefinite contract or a fixed term contract.
  2. 2 Whether the termination of employment on 29 February 2000 constituted an unfair dismissal.
  3. 3 Whether the doctrine of tacit relocation applied to the employment relationship after retirement.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellant was aware, both before and after his retirement, that any further employment would be temporary and subject to the employer's specific needs. The evidence showed that the appellant was offered fixed term contracts, which he refused to sign, and that he was repeatedly informed that his continued employment would not be indefinite. The court held that there was no consensus between the parties for an indefinite contract, and the circumstances did not support the application of the doctrine of tacit relocation. The employment relationship was extended only until 29 February 2000, at which point it was properly terminated. The appeal was dismissed as the...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.