The respondent, an employee of the appellant corporation was dismissed by way of letter. He issued proceedings claiming that he had been wrongly dismissed on the grounds, inter alia, that the Disciplinary code and Grievance Procedure governing his employment had not been correctly followed in that the charges both original and additional were not in the prescribed form and were not made by his immediate supervisor but by the Managing Director, who was the appellate authority, and the dismissal was back-dated to the date of suspension. The appellant filed a defence alleging that the respondent had been properly dismissed without notice on the grounds of his misconduct, a number of instances of which were set out. However, the High Court found that the respondent had been wrongfully dismissed and ordered his reinstatement. On appeal by the respondent it was held:
- That the appellant failed to comply with the correct procedure in the purported dismissal of the respondent.
- That neither of the items referred to in the counterclaim was substantiated and the learned trial judge correctly so found. (iii) There were special circumstances that justified the order for re-instatement.
