- Cassation File Number: 193818.
- Date: Tahsas 28, 2013 E.C..
- Parties:
- Applicant: Amhara Building Works Construction Enterprise.
- Respondent: 1. Ato Getachew Adeba, 2. Ato Tilahun Alemu.
Summary of Facts: The Respondents, welders, alleged they were illegally terminated after their employer merged with the Applicant enterprise. The Applicant argued the termination was legal because the Respondents were hired for a “specific project/workload” that had concluded and that the Respondents had actually left voluntarily after refusing a wage reduction from 150 ETB to 120 ETB per day. The Woreda Court initially sided with the employer, but the High Court reversed this, finding the termination illegal and awarding various compensations.
Legal Rule (Ratio Decidendi): Under Article 23(2) of Labour Proclamation No. 1156/2011, the “amalgamation, division or transfer of ownership” of an undertaking does not have the effect of terminating an employment contract. Furthermore, a Cassation Division does not have the jurisdiction to re-evaluate the “weight of evidence” (የማስረጃ ምዘና) or factual findings established by lower courts unless there is a clear violation of fundamental evidentiary principles.
Reasoning: The High Court established as a fact that the welding work had not actually ended and that the Applicant terminated the Respondents simply because they refused a unilateral downward modification of their wages following the merger. The Cassation Division reasoned that since the merger itself is not a legal ground for termination, and because the employer failed to prove the work had truly concluded, the termination was illegal. The Court also noted that payments following a termination must be settled within seven working days according to Article 36 of the Proclamation; failing this justifies the penalty for delayed payment.
Decision: Upheld (The High Court’s decision finding the termination illegal and awarding compensation is affirmed).
Cited Provisions of Law: FDRE Constitution Art. 80(3)(a); Labour Proclamation No. 1156/2011 Arts. 10(1)(a/e), 23(2), 24(1), 36; Federal Courts Proclamation No. 25/1988 Art. 10; Civil Procedure Code Art. 348(1).
Cited Binding Cassation Decisions: The parties referenced Case Nos. 79857, 37201, 40305, 25526, 20885, and 11924 in their arguments.