Company must take back worker acquitted by court

Any employees - who have been acquitted by courts - must be allowed to rejoin work at their old company, according to a new principle established by Dubai highest court, the Court of Cassation.

Even in cases where workers have been in custody but have not been tried and are let free - have the right to rejoin work.

The court clarified that it would be deemed illegal if the company does not take back the employee, especially under two circumstances.

One is that the workers are acquitted of all charges, even in cases brought in by third parties.

The second instance is when a company files charges against the worker and terminates him. If the worker is acquitted, the company has to take him back.

The court ruled that in case an employee is jailed, the employer should have made the complaint and submitted proof against the accused before terminating him. And in case a worker needs to be terminated, there should be a strong case of professional irregularities against him.

The court advised employees to keep a record in case they are called upon to prove their innocence against charges.

The court also confirmed that each of the parties has the right to end the employment contract for legitimate reasons, provided they give one another 30-day notice. And in case one of them cannot provide the notice period, then they must compensate the other duly.

The court issued these principles with regards to a case of an Emirati bank employee who was terminated arbitrarily after 27 years of service because he was accused in a case.

The employee sought Dh2.4 million from the bank, which included a 11-month period when he was in custody pending trial.

The Emirati was a branch manager at the bank and drew a salary of Dh24,000 a month.

He said in his complaint that he had been suspended from work because he was arrested pending report against him from one of the bank's clients and then got the final judgment of acquittal.

He added that though he had been acquitted in the case, the bank refused to take him back and declined to pay him his dues.

When the Court of First Instance dismissed the case, he moved the Court of Appeals, which ordered the bank to pay Dh600,000 – including Dh576,000 as end-of-service gratuity and Dh24,000 as notice allowance.

Both the parties, however, did not accept the verdict and moved the Court of Cassation, which rejected the Emirati's request to compel the bank to pay him dues for the period which he was in jail as well as compensation for unfair dismissal after the court was sure there was no proof of malicious accusations from the employer against him.

The court made it clear that the employee was suspended from work because of the criminal case filed against him by one of the bank's clients and the bank didn’t have anything against him.

Also the court said the employee was fired for committing professional and managerial irregularities which is a justifiable reason to terminate the employee and could not prove that he was abused.

However, the court insisted that the bank had to pay compensation for the not giving due notice period.

(Home page image courtesy Shutterstock)

ALSO READ:

Is it okay to grab a bite in the supermarket while shopping?

Gold price destroyed; plunges 10% in a day: Will India come to the rescue?

Follow Emirates 24|7 on Google News.