Frona v (1) Floris (2) Floyd [2015] DIFC SCT 083 (30 June 2015)

The employment contract was with the Second Defendant, not the First Defendant. There was no evidence of transfer or termination of the contract. The Second Defendant failed to pay the April and May 2015 salaries and did not attend or respond to the claim. Therefore, the Second Defendant is liable for the unpaid salary.

Citation: [2015] DIFC SCT 083
Parties: Claimant: Frona; First Defendant: Floris; Second Defendant: Floyd
Jurisdiction: United Arab Emirates
Judgment Date: 30 June 2015
Procedural Posture: Small Claim / Judgment
Outcome: Claim against First Defendant dismissed; claim against Second Defendant allowed.
Legal Topics: Employment Contract, Unpaid Salary, Employer Liability, Employee Suspension

Employment Law Employment Contract Unpaid Salary Employer Liability Employee Suspension

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Frona

Claimant

Floris

First Defendant

Floyd

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Small Claim / Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether the First Defendant is liable as employer for unpaid salary
2 Whether the Second Defendant is liable for unpaid salary under the employment contract

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Claim against First Defendant dismissed; claim against Second Defendant allowed.

Orders

Claim against First Defendant dismissed.
Second Defendant to pay Claimant AED 15,000 for April and May 2015 salary.