The court of first instance rejected the case and obligated it to pay

An employee demands an employer for a salary difference of 932,000 dirhams

The Abu Dhabi Court of First Instance ruled to reject a compensation lawsuit filed by an employee against an employer, in which she demanded compensation in the amount of 932 thousand dirhams, due to a difference in salaries between her and employees of the same job rank in the same employer, and the court ruled rejecting the case, and obliging the plaintiff to pay the expenses.

In the details, an employee filed a lawsuit, in which she demanded the employer for 932 thousand dirhams, in compensation for the earnings she missed, the loss that befell her, the moral, material and moral harm that befell her, and obligating him to pay fees and expenses, based on the evidence that the plaintiff was working for the plaintiff He has the position of a liaison team leader with a monthly salary of 21 thousand and 220 dirhams, while the employees holding the same position receive a salary higher than the salary they are receiving, despite her promotion and assigning the position of a team leader to her, and the defendant has delayed submitting experience certificates to the plaintiff, which led to He prohibited her from providing her expertise to other employers.

During the consideration of the lawsuit, each of its parties attended by a representative on his behalf, and the present on behalf of the defendant submitted a memorandum in which he requested that the lawsuit not be accepted, because the reason for it was not accepted, and in precaution the rejection of the case. The plaintiff has an account with a bank in the state, while the court considers it because it did not comply with his answer, and that it does not change the opinion of the case.

The court clarified, in the merits of the ruling, that the plaintiff had requested compensation for the damages caused by the defendant in terms of her lack of equality with the rest of the employees, and that they were paid a higher salary despite the equality in job ranks, and that the defendant refused to issue an experience certificate to her, which caused her damages. And that, to prove tort liability, its elements must be present in error, damage and causation, and that the lawsuit papers are free from the defendant’s mistake by not implementing the system and the special policies of his human resources, or breaching his obligations towards the plaintiff.

The court confirmed that the employee attended and did not present the system and promotion policies followed by the defendant, so that the elements of tort liability do not exist, and the court must reject the case in its case, as the authority has the right to determine the employee’s salary, based on the employee’s qualifications, experience, and the flexibility of job grades, or any Other data related to the authority, and it decided to dismiss the case, and to oblige the plaintiff to pay the expenses.

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