fixed-term contractscontract repudiationcasualisation of labourarbitral award appeal
legislation
Statutes Cited
Labour Act
Labour Act
Labour Act
ai analysis
Case Summary
Key Issues
{"issue_text":"Whether the Arbitrator erred in finding that appellants repudiated their contracts by refusing to sign after three weeks of work","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Appellants worked three weeks without signed contracts; refused to sign when requested"}
{"issue_text":"Whether continuous renewal of fixed-term contracts results in permanent employment under Section 12(3) of the Labour Act","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Five years of successive two-month contracts"}
{"issue_text":"Whether the employer was guilty of casualisation of labour","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Continuous renewal of short-term contracts over five years"}
{"issue_text":"Whether the Arbitrator strayed from agreed terms of reference","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Terms of reference focused on lawfulness of termination and service package entitlement"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
Two employees employed on successive two-month fixed-term contracts for five years refused to sign new contracts after three weeks of work, claiming they had become permanent employees. Employer terminated their employment when they refused to sign.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases