david mwakatika vs ttcl corporaton tanzania telecommunication corporation and another 2021 tzhcld 515 15 october 2021

david mwakatika vs ttcl corporaton tanzania telecommunication corporation and another 2021 tzhcld 515 15 october 2021

The employer failed to conduct and communicate the required performance appraisal, which was a condition precedent for non-renewal of the contract. The termination was therefore both substantively and procedurally unfair, entitling the applicant to compensation.

Citation
david mwakatika vs ttcl corporaton tanzania telecommunication corporation and another 2021 tzhcld 515 15 october 2021
Parties
Applicant: David Mwakatika; 1st Respondent: TTCL Corporation (Tanzania Telecommunication Corporation); 2nd Respondent: Attorney General
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
15 October 2021
Procedural Posture
Labour Revision / Judgment
Outcome
Application allowed; CMA award revised and set aside.
Legal Topics
Unfair Termination, Fixed Term Contract, Reasonable Expectation of Renewal, Performance Appraisal, Employment Remedies
Source Language
English
Labour Law Unfair Termination Fixed Term Contract Reasonable Expectation of Renewal Performance Appraisal Employment Remedies

Case Brief

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Mwakatika

Applicant

TTCL Corporation (Tanzania Telecommunication Corporation)

1st Respondent

Attorney General

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Labour Revision / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the CMA erred in not considering performance appraisal as the main criteria for renewal or termination of the employment contract.
  2. 2 Whether it was lawful for the employer to end the employment contract without valid reasons where the employee had a reasonable expectation of renewal.
  3. 3 Whether the CMA award was tainted with irrationality and illegality.

Ratio Decidendi

The employer failed to conduct and communicate the required performance appraisal, which was a condition precedent for non-renewal of the contract. The termination was therefore both substantively and procedurally unfair, entitling the applicant to compensation.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; CMA award revised and set aside.

Orders

  • 1st respondent to pay the applicant compensation equivalent to 36 months’ salary (Tshs. 91,722,096).
  • Applicant entitled to repatriation expenses, ex-gratia payment of three months’ salary, social security entitlements, and certificate of service as per contract and company policy.