(Mauritius) The claimant said that his dismissal was automatically unfair under local statute. He had become involved in a fight after a road traffic incident and had been convicted. In the meantime his employers had promoted him, but then dismissed him on the basis of his conviction. The incident had no connection with his work. The appeal concerned whether he was entitled to an opportunity to answer any proposed dismissal.
Held: The dismissal was unfair and the appeal succeeded. The section appeared to require the employer to allow the employee an opportunity to answer any charges. The criminal hearing itself was not such an opportunity. The ‘provision is not only expressed in what appears to be very wide and general terms, but is intended to give an employee who may be facing dismissal an important substantive right, namely to make out a case to his employer as to why he should not be dismissed. ‘
Judges:
Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Lord Mance, Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury
Citations:
[2007] UKPC 17
Links:
Commonwealth, Employment
Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.250050