You are here:
SAFLII >>
Databases >>
Malawi: Industrial Relations Court >>
2007 >>
[2007] MWIRC 2
[Database Search]
[Name Search]
[Recent Decisions]
[Noteup]
[Help]
Chagunda v Priceworth Wholesalers (IRC 352 of 2006) [2007] MWIRC 2 (31 December 2007)
.RTF of original document
IN THE INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COURT OF MALAWI
PRINCIPAL REGISTRY
MATTER NUMBER IRC 352 OF 2006
BETWEEN
CHAGUNDA…..……...……………………………...…………………..
APPLICANT
-and-
PRICEWORTH WHOLESALERS…………..………...……………...RESPONDENT
CORAM:
R ZIBELU BANDA (MS); CHAIRPERSON
MRN PADAMBO; EMPLOYEES’ PANELIST
D NAMANDWA; EMPLOYERS’ PANELIST
Applicant; present
Respondent; Absent no excuse
Chinkudzu; Official Interpreter
JUDGMENT
1.
Dismissal-Reason for dismissal- Misconduct- Absenteeism
2.
Procedure- Opportunity to be heard- and defend oneself-Employee to be given a chance to explain his side and defend himself
Facts
The applicant was employed on 8 January 1993 as driver. His services were terminated on 6 June 2006. The reason was that he had left
the office to attend a funeral of a relative. The applicant stated that he had asked for permission to attend the funeral. Yet when
he reported back for duties he was dismissed. He was not given a hearing. He took out this action alleging that the dismissal was
unfair. The respondent was invited to a hearing but they did not attend court. No reason was given for non attendance. The court
invoked provisions of section 74 of the Labour Relations Act and proceeded to dispose of the case.
The Law
Absence from work can be a reason for dismissal according to section 59 Employment Act. However where authority is given to be absent
from work, an employer is not entitled to dismiss such employee. The applicant alleged that he was absent from work for a valid reason
and after getting permission from his supervisor. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, the court finds that the dismissal
was based on an invalid reason.
Procedure
The applicant alleged that he was not given a hearing before the dismissal. The court finds that the respondent did not comply with
a fair procedure before dismissal .
Finding
The Court finds that the respondent did not comply with the law. The reason was not valid and the applicant was not given any hearing.
The respondent violated section 57 of the Employment Act. This termination was therefore unfair .
Assessment of Award
The applicant is entitled to an award under section 63 of the Employment Act. He is also entitled to notice pay and severance allowance
as claimed. The court shall set down a date to assess compensation. Both parties shall be required to attend the assessment.
Any party aggrieved by this decision is at liberty to appeal to the High Court within 30 days of this judgment.
Made this 31st day of December 2007 at BLANTYRE.
Rachel Zibelu Banda
CHAIRPERSON
Maxwell RN Padambo
EMPLOYEES’ PANELIST
Daphter Namandwa
EMPLOYERS’ PANELIST
SAFLII:
|
Terms of Use
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.saflii.org/mw/cases/MWIRC/2007/2.html
