BoT appeals against High Court on wrongful termination

Daily News;

The Bank of Tanzania (BoT) has appealed to the Court of Appeal to challenge the decision of the High Court, which ruled in favour of its employee, Emerenciana Chrysostom, who had demanded 94m/- compensation for illegal termination of her job.

It is asking the Appeal Court to allow the appeal and set aside part of the judgment given on August 28, last year, by Judge Amir Mruma against the Central Bank for having erred in law in awarding the former employee general damages. Ms Chrysostom was employed in BoT as “Second Assistant” beginning September 9, 1985.

In 1992, she requested her employer to release her to join the University of Dar es Salaam for higher education. The request was granted. However, instead of being released, her employment services were terminated with effect from October 9, 1992. Since Chrysostom did not request to be terminated, she sought clarification on the matter.

The bank, in its letter dated May 25, 1993, corrected the error inadvertently committed and informed her that the bank had accepted her request to be released from duty. She continued with her studies, but upon completion in 1995, the bank refused to accept her back to the service on account that there were changes which had taken place within the bank to the effect of not accommodating her.

Ms Chrysostom claimed that the decision of the bank of refusing to accept her back amounted to wrongful dismissal from service and filed a suit, claiming a total of 94m/-, including loss of salary for a period of 20 years from 1985 to 2005 at 3.6m/- per annum.

She demanded 12m/- as loss of allowances for the same period and loss of bonus of 10m/- within the same period. The employee also claimed general damages she had suffered.
On August 28, last year, trial judge granted the request regarding salaries.

Judge Mruma directed the bank to pay its employee salaries from November 1995 to the date when they would legally terminate her services in accordance with the letters of her appointment and confirmation. He also ordered for her to be paid 20m/- general damages. He ruled that there was no dispute that Ms Chrysostom suffered mental anguish for the bank's decision to refuse to accept her back to her job. However, the judge dismissed the requests regarding payments of loss of allowances and bonus for lack of proof.