Lamont v Eden District Municipality (P182/2012) [2015] ZALCPE 22 (25 March 2015) per Euijen AJ.
An unconditional offer of reinstatement made four months after the expiry of a fixed-term employment contract meant that the employee could not claim more than four months as compensation or damages whether the breach was regarded as unlawful or unfair. The cause of action might be different but the result is the same.
[1] This is an application founded both in contract and on an alleged breach of section 189 of the Labour Relations Act, no 66 of 1995 (the LRA), which seeks the applicant’s reinstatement, alternatively payment of all amounts due to him for the remainder of a fixed term contract, including two performance bonuses and, in addition, compensation for the unfair termination of his employment in terms of section 195 of the LRA in an unspecified amount. At the hearing, Mr Lamont abandoned his claim for reinstatement and limited the relief he sought to the damages and compensation set out in the alternative prayer. The fixed term contract upon which his claim is based had, in any event, expired by the date of this hearing.
[2] The respondent for its part, denies that it dismissed the applicant Mr Lamont; it contends that he deserted. In the alternative and, if it be found that Mr Lamont was dismissed, i.e. that his contract was unlawfully or unfairly terminated, then the respondent pleads that it tendered to reinstate him unconditionally in writing on 25 September 2012, which tender was repeated as a formal tender in terms of Rule 22A of the Rules of this Court on 8 October 2012, which has not been accepted by the applicant. This consequently limits the amount of the applicant’s claim to four month’s salary whether viewed as contractual damages or compensation for an unfair dismissal.