In Toyota SA Motors (Pty) Ltd v CCMA & others (2016) 37 ILJ 313 (CC), the Constitutional Court (CC) entertained an appeal directly from the Labour Court (bypassing the Labour Appeal Court, something it rarely allows), to determine a matter relating to when reinstatement can be awarded as a remedy for unfair dismissal. An employee of Toyota SA had been absent without leave for a period of time and had been called to a disciplinary hearing to explain this absence, whereupon the employee submitted his resignation. Toyota SA chose to convene the disciplinary hearing anyway during the employee’s notice period, and dismissed the employee. An arbitrator held the dismissal was substantively unfair and ordered Toyota SA to reinstate the employee and pay him six months’ salary as back-pay. The question of whether it is possible to reinstate an employee who had already resigned (as his employment contract would have come to an end anyway by resignation) was not explicitly decided by the majority of the CC judges, because this issue had not been raised when the matter was before the Labour Court, but in a minority judgment, a judge found that a Court could not order an employer to reinstate an employee who had resigned, unless the employer agreed to do so, given that the employee’s employment had already come to an end through the unilateral act of resignation.