Note
This is Unofficial Translation of the Amharic Text
Cassation File No. 38331
Yekatit 17, 2001 E.C.
Judges: Abdulkadir Mohammed
Hagos Woldu
Hirut Melese
Belachew Anshiso
Sultan Abatemam
Applicant: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church, Bale Diocese, Goba St. Gabriel Church – Agent Tewodros Arefeayne appeared
– Merigeta Merawi Seyoum
We have examined the file and rendered the following judgment.
The dispute presented to the Cassation Court in this case concerns whether the employment relationship of employees providing religious or spiritual services with the religious institution is covered by the Labour Proclamation or not.
The respondent, who provides spiritual services at the applicant church, filed a suit at the Oromia National Regional State Goba Woreda Court claiming that the church unlawfully dismissed him from work and requested to be reinstated to his work with the payment of his salary. The court to which the suit was submitted, after hearing the arguments of both parties, decided that since the case concerns persons engaged in providing spiritual services, it is not to be seen under the Labour Proclamation, and the High Court to which an appeal was submitted affirmed the decision. On the other hand, the respondent objected to this decision and submitted a petition to the Cassation Bench of the Oromia National Regional State Supreme Court, and the argument was heard at this level as well. Finally, the bench reversed the decisions given by the lower courts and decided that the case is to be seen under the Labour Proclamation. The cassation petition is submitted against this.
This Cassation Bench has also examined the decision against which the petition was submitted based on the point of law: is the employment relationship of employees providing religious or spiritual services with the religious institution covered by the Labour Proclamation? Or is it not covered?
The Cassation Bench, in its decision given on Ginbot 4, 1998 E.C. under File No. 18419, by interpreting the relevant legal provisions, has given a legal interpretation stating that the employment relationship of an employee providing religious services with the religious institution is not covered by the Labour Proclamation.
Therefore, in this case, while the Cassation Bench of the Oromia National Regional State Supreme Court should have rejected the respondent’s claim as it is not covered by the Labour Proclamation No. 377/2003 (377/96 E.C.), its decision stating that the case is covered by this law is found to contain an error of law.
D E C I S I O N
1. The decision given by the Cassation Bench of the Oromia National Regional State Supreme Court on Megabit 29, 2000 E.C. under File No. 48401 is reversed in accordance with Article 348(1) of the Civil Procedure Code. Let it be written.
2.
3. Regarding costs and expenses, the parties shall bear their own. Let the file be returned.
Contains the illegible signatures of five judges