Yeko v Red Mining South Deep (PTY) LTD (JS 633/18) [2022] ZALCJHB 74 (22 March 2022)

Yeko v Red Mining South Deep (PTY) LTD (JS 633/18) [2022] ZALCJHB 74 (22 March 2022)

The applicant's employment was on a fixed term contract tied to the rail contract, which ended on 3 January 2017. Although the respondent initiated a retrenchment process and terminated the applicant's employment before the contract's natural expiry, the actual termination occurred on 1 March 2017, coinciding with the end of the contract. The court found that the dismissal was substantively fair, as the respondent had a commercial rationale for retrenchment due to loss of business. The selection criteria for dismissal were agreed upon with the majority union, binding all affected employees, including the applicant. The applicant failed to prove the existence of vacancies that could have...

Citation
[2022] ZALCJHB 74
Parties
Applicant: Dumisani Yeko; Respondent: Red Mining South Deep (PTY) LTD
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 March 2022
Case Number
JS 633/18
Procedural Posture
Unfair Dismissal Application / Judgment
Outcome
The applicant's claim is dismissed. The dismissal is substantively fair.
Judges
G N Moshoana
Legal Topics
Fixed Term Contracts, Operational Requirements Dismissal, Selection Criteria, Section 197 Transfer, Procedural Fairness Limitation
Labour Law Fixed Term Contracts Operational Requirements Dismissal Selection Criteria Section 197 Transfer Procedural Fairness Limitation

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dumisani Yeko

Applicant

Red Mining South Deep (PTY) LTD

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Unfair Dismissal Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the termination of the applicant's fixed term contract constituted a dismissal under the Labour Relations Act.
  2. 2 Whether the dismissal of the applicant was substantively fair based on operational requirements.
  3. 3 Whether the selection criteria for dismissal were fair and agreed upon.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's employment was on a fixed term contract tied to the rail contract, which ended on 3 January 2017. Although the respondent initiated a retrenchment process and terminated the applicant's employment before the contract's natural expiry, the actual termination occurred on 1 March 2017, coinciding with the end of the contract. The court found that the dismissal was substantively fair, as the respondent had a commercial rationale for retrenchment due to loss of business. The selection criteria for dismissal were agreed upon with the majority union, binding all affected employees, including the applicant. The applicant failed to prove the existence of vacancies that could have...

Court Disposition

The applicant's claim is dismissed. The dismissal is substantively fair.

Orders

  • The dismissal of Yeko is substantively fair.
  • The claim of Yeko is dismissed.