Wanless v Fidelity (Pty) Ltd (D119/06) [2007] ZALC 107; (2008) 29 ILJ 2030 (LC) (27 September 2007)

Wanless v Fidelity (Pty) Ltd (D119/06) [2007] ZALC 107; (2008) 29 ILJ 2030 (LC) (27 September 2007)

The Court found that Mrs Wanless's employment terminated in accordance with her contract of employment and pension fund, both of which fixed her retirement age at 60. Fidelity, as successor employer under section 197 of the LRA, was bound by these terms. No express or implied agreement to extend her retirement age to 65 was proved, nor did Fidelity's customs, culture, practices, or policies support such an extension. The differentiation between former Supercare and Fidelity employees was rational and lawful, based on inherited contractual terms. The discrimination claim failed as it was not properly pleaded or substantiated, and no factual basis for discrimination was established. The...

Citation
[2007] ZALC 107
Parties
Applicant: J J Wanless; Respondent: Fidelity (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
27 September 2007
Case Number
D119/06
Procedural Posture
Labour Litigation / Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed with costs.
Judges
Pillay D
Legal Topics
Retirement Age, Automatic Unfair Dismissal, Employment Contract Variation, Discrimination Claim, Section 197 Transfer, Employment Equity
Labour Law Retirement Age Automatic Unfair Dismissal Employment Contract Variation Discrimination Claim Section 197 Transfer Employment Equity

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

J J Wanless

Applicant

Fidelity (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Labour Litigation / Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was Mrs Wanless dismissed by Fidelity or did her employment terminate by effluxion of time?
  2. 2 Was the termination of her employment automatically unfair or unfair under the Labour Relations Act?
  3. 3 Did Fidelity agree, expressly or impliedly, to extend her retirement age to 65?

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that Mrs Wanless's employment terminated in accordance with her contract of employment and pension fund, both of which fixed her retirement age at 60. Fidelity, as successor employer under section 197 of the LRA, was bound by these terms. No express or implied agreement to extend her retirement age to 65 was proved, nor did Fidelity's customs, culture, practices, or policies support such an extension. The differentiation between former Supercare and Fidelity employees was rational and lawful, based on inherited contractual terms. The discrimination claim failed as it was not properly pleaded or substantiated, and no factual basis for discrimination was established. The...

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The claim is dismissed with costs.