Another salary of 45 working days and 3 months compensation for termination of services

153 thousand dirhams compensation for a bank employee who was fired without investigation

The Abu Dhabi Labor Court - Appeal has decided to amend the ruling of the Court of First Instance requiring a bank to pay its former employee an amount of 159,000 dirhams late salary and compensation for unfair dismissal, and the Court of Appeal ruled to reduce the amount decided by making it 153,000.

In the details, the employee filed a lawsuit against the bank and requested the ruling obligating him to pay her her labor dues, which are two months late, and three months' salary in compensation for unfair dismissal, a certificate of experience, fees and charges of the case, and the inclusion of the ruling for expedited execution without bail, indicating that she worked in The bank has eight years with a monthly salary of 34 thousand dirhams, and that she did not receive her dues for the last two months of work, which forced him to file this case to adjudicate the advanced requests.

During the hearing of the case in a court of first instance, the two parties exchanged notes, and the defendant bank requested a set-off between its receivables and the plaintiff’s dues. He also requested the rejection of the case, and the court decided, before deciding on the matter, to assign an accounting expert who deposited his report, and the court ruled to oblige the defendant bank to pay the plaintiff an amount 159 thousand dirhams, and a certificate of experience for the period of work, and expenses, and 200 dirhams in return for attorneys' fees, and rejected other requests.

The defendant bank did not consent to this court, so he appealed against him with the appeal, and in which he obeyed the verdict in violation of the documented evidence that the employee against whom the appellant has been terminated her services and is entitled to a wage for 15 days from the last month of her work, and she is not entitled to compensation compensation for the unfair dismissal, as her services were justified terminated. This is due to her inefficiency and poor performance, failure to comply with work instructions and regulations, permanent delay in work schedules, and her absence without a legitimate reason or excuse, and the bank issued a warning to her to terminate her services with a month’s notice, and at the conclusion of its reasons he requested to reject the appealed judgment, and to judge again to reject The lawsuit and the legal set-off to settle the accounts between the two parties, as a precaution, to return the case to the previous expert, and to oblige the appellant to pay the fees and expenses and in return for the attorneys ’fees for the two levels of litigation.

The Court of Appeal indicated that the documents established that the bank did not follow the procedure stipulated by law, as it punished the employee appealed against with dismissal from service before informing her in writing of what is attributed to her, hearing her statements and investigating her defense, and proving this in a report deposited in her own file and indicating the penalty in The end of the record, and there are no papers indicating the occurrence of the investigation, so dismissing the appellant is against the law.

The court pointed out that the obituary on the appealed judgment was wrong in the judgment for the employee with two salaries for the last two months from the date of her work, as a response to it that the Labor Relations Regulation Law recognized that it is not permissible to prove payment of wages to workers except by writing, acknowledgment or oath, and it showed that the documents, the appealed judgment and expert reports, That the appellant bank did not provide evidence of acquittal of the salary demanded for the last 45 days of the employee who was appealed against, which is what the court decides regarding salaries, and thus the appealed judgment in this part is amended.

The court ruled accepting the appeal formally, and on the subject of the appeal, amending the appealed decision by reducing the amount decided by making it 153 thousand and 323 dirhams and 23 fils, and to support it with the exception of that, and obligated the appellant in proportion to the expenses.

Follow our latest local and sports news, and the latest political and economic developments via Google news