amsons industries t ltd vs mashaka marusu 2020 tzhcld 1 14 december 2020

amsons industries t ltd vs mashaka marusu 2020 tzhcld 1 14 december 2020

The applicant failed to prove the existence of a fixed term contract, and thus the respondent is presumed to have been employed on a permanent basis. The applicant did not have a valid reason for termination and failed to follow fair procedures, rendering the termination both substantively and procedurally unfair....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
amsons industries t ltd vs mashaka marusu 2020 tzhcld 1 14 december 2020
Parties
Applicant: Amsons Industries (T) Ltd; Respondent: Mashaka Marusu
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
14 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Labour Revision Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Employment Contract Classification, Unfair Termination, Compensation for Unfair Dismissal, Procedural Fairness in Termination
Source Language
english
Labour Law Employment Contract Classification Unfair Termination Compensation for Unfair Dismissal Procedural Fairness in Termination

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Amsons Industries (T) Ltd

Applicant

Mashaka Marusu

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Labour Revision Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent was employed under a permanent or fixed term contract
  2. 2 Whether the applicant had a valid reason for terminating the respondent
  3. 3 Whether the termination was procedurally and substantively fair

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to prove the existence of a fixed term contract, and thus the respondent is presumed to have been employed on a permanent basis. The applicant did not have a valid reason for termination and failed to follow fair procedures, rendering the termination both substantively and procedurally unfair. The compensation awarded by the arbitrator was justified and should not be interfered with.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Arbitrator's award upheld
  • Compensation to respondent maintained