Claim No. SCT 017/2013
THE DUBAI INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL CENTRE COURTS
In the name of His Highness Sheikh Mohammad Bin Rashid Al Maktoum, Ruler of Dubai
IN THE SMALL CLAIMS TRIBUNAL OF DIFC COURTS
BEFORE SCT JUDGE SHAMLAN AL SAWALEHI
Hearing: 25 November 2013
Judgment: 25 November 2013
JUDGMENT OF H.E. JUSTICE SHAMLAN AL SAWALEHI
UPON hearing the Claimant and the Defendant
AND UPON reading the submissions and evidence filed and recorded on the Court file
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. The Defendant shall pay the Claimant the sum of AED 3,200.
1. The Claimant alleged that she had been employed by the Defendant from 1 January 2013 until 3 September 2013 when she submitted her resignation.
2. The Claimant requested that the Defendant pay her the benefits due at the end of her Employment Contract. The Defendant had refused to pay the Claimant, which had led the Claimant to file this case before the Court.
3. No settlement was reached by the parties at the end of the consultation and, consequently, the case was sent for adjudication. On 25 November 2013 I heard both parties’ submissions.
4. In her Particulars of Claim, the Claimant argued that she had resigned from the defendant company, but that she had not received her dues and benefits within the 14 days following the end of her Employment Contract, in accordance with Article 18. (1) of the Employment Amendment Law No.3 of 2012 of DIFC Law No.4 of 2005.
5. The Claimant had specified her claims for unpaid salary for one month (November 2013), compensation in lieu of her vacation leave and end of service gratuity.
6. In its defence and during the hearing, the Defendant accepted that the Claimant may have the right to claim unpaid salary and 18 days for untaken vacation leave.
7. However, the Defendant argued that the Claimant’s contract had been self-terminated by the employee before the end of the agreed duration of the employment contract which would have expired on 1 January 2016. Therefore, the Claimant’s end of employment benefits should cover all the Defendant loss, costs and expenses that were caused by the Claimant’s resignation.
8. I have examined both parties submissions and I have found that the evidence submitted by the Defendant in support of its argument on the alleged loss, costs and expenses is neither sufficient nor reasonable to establish authorised deduction, as is required by Article 19 of Employment Amendment Law No.3 of 2012 of DIFC Law No.4 of 2005.
9. Furthermore, I have found that the Claimant is entitled to her November salary and compensation in lieu of her vacation leave for 18 days, in total the sum of AED 3,200 only.
10. Furthermore, I have found that the evidence submitted by the Claimant is neither sufficient nor reasonable to establish that the Defendant is contractually or legally liable to pay any extra amount beyond what has been decided in paragraph 9 of this Order.
Nassir Al Nasser
Date of Issue: 26 November 2013