samson kapongo vs chief executive officer ttcl 2020 tzhcld 32 4 march 2020

samson kapongo vs chief executive officer ttcl 2020 tzhcld 32 4 march 2020

The respondent did not have a valid reason for terminating the applicant, as the alleged misconduct was not proved and the applicant was acquitted of criminal charges. The respondent also failed to fully adhere to procedural requirements, as the applicant's appeal was not heard before termination was finalized. The applicant is entitled to compensation for unfair termination, but reinstatement is not feasible due to the passage of time and soured relations.

Citation
samson kapongo vs chief executive officer ttcl 2020 tzhcld 32 4 march 2020
Parties
Applicant: Samson Kapongo; Respondent: Chief Executive Officer, TTCL
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
4 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Labour Revision / Judgment
Outcome
Application granted. CMA award revised and set aside.
Legal Topics
Unfair Termination, Reinstatement, Compensation, Procedural Fairness, Employment Contracts
Source Language
English
Labour Law Unfair Termination Reinstatement Compensation Procedural Fairness Employment Contracts

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Samson Kapongo

Applicant

Chief Executive Officer, TTCL

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Labour Revision / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the award was procured out of the prescribed time
  2. 2 Whether the respondent had a valid reason for terminating the applicant
  3. 3 Whether the respondent adhered to the procedures in terminating the applicant

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent did not have a valid reason for terminating the applicant, as the alleged misconduct was not proved and the applicant was acquitted of criminal charges. The respondent also failed to fully adhere to procedural requirements, as the applicant's appeal was not heard before termination was finalized. The applicant is entitled to compensation for unfair termination, but reinstatement is not feasible due to the passage of time and soured relations.

Court Disposition

Application granted. CMA award revised and set aside.

Orders

  • Respondent to pay applicant full salary from July 2006 to May 2010 (42 months) at Tshs. 645,012 per month, totaling Tshs. 27,090,504.
  • Applicant to be paid statutory compensation as per Section 35(a) and (b) of SEA.