{"issue_text":"Whether the Labour Officer's award of 8 months' wages as damages for unlawful termination was appropriate","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Employee became permanent after probation; termination was unlawful"}
{"issue_text":"Whether clause 14 of the employment contract applied to limit damages to one month's wages","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Clause 14 covers events after \"fixed date\" of 31 December 2022"}
{"issue_text":"Whether the employee failed to mitigate damages","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Employee should have secured alternative employment"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
The 2nd respondent was employed as Finance Manager with a 3-month probation period ending 9 April 2022. On 16 May 2022, the 1st respondent terminated his employment claiming unsuccessful probation. The Labour Officer found this constituted unlawful termination and awarded 8 months' wages as damages. The employer opposed confirmation, arguing the employee was entitled to only one month's wages.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases