Public Utilities Company v Savy (CA 23/2020) [2021] SCSC 1002 (29 September 2021)
The Employment Tribunal erred in concluding that the termination letter did not specify the serious disciplinary offence. The appellant's letters, read together, provided sufficient notice and justification for termination based on gross insubordination as defined under Schedule 2 Part II of the Employment Act.
- Citation
- [2021] SCSC 1002
- Parties
- Appellant: Public Utilities Company; Respondent: Davis Savy
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction
- Seychelles
- Judgment Date
- 29 September 2021
- Case Number
- CA 23/2020
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
- Outcome
- appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Disciplinary Procedures, Termination of Employment, Serious Disciplinary Offence, Insubordination
- Source Language
- English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Public Utilities Company
Appellant
Davis Savy
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in awarding compensation to the respondent for termination without proper notice of disciplinary offence
- 2 Whether the termination letter must specify the offence under Schedule 2 Part II of the Employment Act
Ratio Decidendi
The Employment Tribunal erred in concluding that the termination letter did not specify the serious disciplinary offence. The appellant's letters, read together, provided sufficient notice and justification for termination based on gross insubordination as defined under Schedule 2 Part II of the Employment Act.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed
Orders
- The appeal is allowed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment