||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 301 (Jun)
|| UKPC 43
Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Carswell, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood and Lord Mance
||25 June 2007
Mauritius - Employment - Termination - Unjustified termination of agreement - Dismissal for misconduct - Whether dismissal effected within seven days of completion of disciplinary committee hearing - Whether termination of respondent's contract of employment unjustified - Labour (Mauritius) Act 1975, s 32.
Mauritius Employment. Although it might seem strange to describe the termination of an employee's employment for established misconduct as unjustified merely because the necessary notice reached the employee eight, rather than seven days after the completion of the disciplinary hearing, nevertheless, the legislature in Mauritius had adopted a policy of laying down a fixed time limit with the aim of ensuring that both parties knew where they stood. In the instant case the company was not entitled to dismiss the respondent for alleged misconduct under s32(1)(b) of the Labour (Mauritius) Act 1975.
- An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary