KCC 63/2004

This case involved a claim by an employee for unpaid dues. It was wrongly argued this case should not be heard as the case had been settled. This was not the case as the parties and subject of the dispute were different from the previous case.

Background

An employee made a complaint against a company and requested the Labour Department to order the company to pay him overtime pay. The department referred the case to the court.

The court rejected the case.

The employee appealed the ruling before the court of appeal. The court abandoned the appealed ruling and ruled the case should not be considered because it had been previously settled.

Decision

The employee appealed the ruling before the court of cassation and stated in his grounds of appeal that the ruling had erred in the application of law because the court had rejected the case based on the argument that the case was previously settled although the disputed parties and the subject were different in the two cases.

The court stated this argument was valid because the current case made by the employee was different from his previous case in its subject and the disputed parties.