Claim No. SCT 031/2021
THE DUBAI INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL CENTRE COURTS
In the name of His Highness Sheikh Mohammed Bin Rashid Al Maktoum, Ruler of Dubai
IN THE SMALL CLAIMS TRIBUNAL OF DIFC COURTS
BEFORE H.E. JUSTICE NASSIR AL NASSER
BETWEEN
MADRID
Claimant
and
MAEKO
Defendant
| Hearing : | 22 February 2021 |
|---|---|
| Judgment : | 25 February 2021 |
JUDGMENT OF H.E. JUSTICE NASSIR AL NASSER
UPONthe Claim Form being filed on 8 February 2021
AND UPONa Hearing being held before H.E. Justice Nassir Al Nassir on 22 February 2021, with the Claimant and the Defendant’s representatives in attendance.
AND UPONreviewing the documents and evidence filed and recorded on the Court file
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. The Defendant shall pay the Claimant the sum ofAED 2,378.
2. The Defendant shall pay the Claimant the Court fees in the sum ofAED 367.50.
Issued by:
Nassir Al Nasser
SCT Judge and Registrar
Date of issue: 25 February 2021
At: 10am
THE REASONS
The Parties
1. The Claimant is Madrid (the “Claimant”), an individual filing a claim against the Defendant regarding his employment at the Defendant company.
2. The Defendant is the Maeko (the “Defendant”), a hotel registered and located in the DIFC, Dubai, UAE.
Background and the Preceding History
3. The underlying dispute arises over the employment of the Claimant by the Defendant on 16 December 2018 pursuant to an Employment Contract (the “Employment Contract”).
4. On 8 February 2021, the Claimant filed a claim in the DIFC Courts’ Small Claims Tribunal (the “SCT”) seeking flight encashment and an allowance for carrying out night shifts in the sum of AED 2,500.
5. On 10 February 2021, the Defendant filed its defence with the intention to defend all of the claim.
6. On 15 February 2021, a consultation was held before SCT Judge Hayley Norton, however, the parties failed to settle.
The Claim
7. The Claimant’s case is that he was employed with the Defendant from 16 December 2018 to 13 January 2021 upon the completion of his one-month notice.
8. The Claimant submits that the Defendant has failed to make payment to the Claimant in the amount of AED 2,500 in regards to his employment entitlements.
The Defence
9. In its defence, the Defendant submits that the Claimant is not entitled to payment in lieu of unused ticket as the Employment Contract states the following:
“once every 2 years you will be entitled to a return economy class air ticket between Dubai and your Country of origin Kathmandu Nepal at the employer’s expense, to be booked by the employer following agreement with you on the dates of travel – for the avoidance of doubt you will not be entitled to payment in lieu of any unused tickets which will be forfeited.”
10. In relation to the Claimant’s claim for night shift allowance, the Defendant submits that the parties never agreed in the Employment Agreement or any other Agreement that the Claimant will be entitled to night shift allowance.
Discussion
11. This dispute is governed by DIFC Law No. 2 of 2019, as amended by DIFC Law No. 4 of 2020 (the “DIFC Employment Law”) in conjunction with the relevant Employment Contract.
12. The Claimant claims that he is entitled to flight encashment as he has completed 24 months of work with the Defendant.
13. On 1 January 2020 and as revised on 1 January 2021, the Defendant circulated a new Job Aid policy which reads as follows:
“all the non-management roles as stated in their contracts are entitled for one-round trip economy ticket which is provided on completion of 2 years of service anniversary month is calculated as 24 months’ completed from date of joining. Flight ticket allowance will be paid in arrears e.g. Anniversary month is January, flight ticket amount will be paid together with February payroll cycle.”
14. However, the Defendant states that upon an employee leaving their employment, any unused flight accrual will be forfeited.
15. The Defendant submits that the Claimant joined the Defendant on 16 December 2018 and resigned on 14 December 2020, with his last working day on 13 January 2021. Therefore, the Defendant is of the view that as the Claimant left the company, he is not entitled to flight ticket encashment.
16. On the other hand, the Claimant submits that the Job Aid states prior to the completion of 24 months an employee will not be entitled to flight encashment, and submits that ,his case he has completed 24 months and still was not paid the flight encashment to which he is entitled.
17. The Claimant further submits that the interpretation of ‘Upon leaving the company’ relates to employees who do not serve the required notice period, which he submits he completed from 14 December 2020 to 13 January 2021.
18. The Job Aid Policy also states that:
“Upon Resignation: if an employee resigns prior to the completion of 24 months or 730 days, the pro-rated ticket amount will not be paid as part of the final settlement”.
19. I find that the wording “upon leaving the company, any unused flight accrual will be forfeited” is ambiguous. Therefore, I find that, as the Claimant completed 24 months of work with the Defendant, he is entitled to the payment in regards to his flight encashment.
20. As per the Defendant’s air fare list for the year 2020, the fare of the Claimant’s air ticket is AED 2378.
21. In relation to the Claimant’s claim of night shift allowance, this is not supported by any evidence. Therefore, I dismiss the Claimant’s claim for night shift allowance.
Conclusion
22. In light of the aforementioned, I find that the Defendant shall pay the Claimant the sum ofAED 2,378in relation to the flight encashment.
23. The Claimant’s claim for night shift allowance shall be dismissed.
24. The Defendant shall pay the Claimant the Court fees in the sum of AED 367.50.
Issued by:
Nassir Al Nasser
SCT Judge and Registrar
Date of issue: 25 February 2021
At: 10am