The Abu Dhabi Labour Court of First Instance ordered a company to pay Dhs225,483 to an employee who had not been paid his wages for several consecutive months despite having worked for the company.
The company also failed to pay the employee his end-of-service gratuity after more than 17 years of employment.
The company then filed a counterclaim, demanding that the employee return Dhs27,000 as he failed to work during his notice period and received salaries more than he was entitled to.
Specifically, an employee filed a lawsuit against his employer, claiming that his labour rights had been denied.
He requested that the company be ordered to pay him back wages for several consecutive months, totalling Dhs135,000, the end-of-service gratuity of Dhs93,000, and the legal fees and expenses.
The Court explained that the resignation document clearly showed that the employee was entitled to a salary for 21 days. The court also established from the data on wages paid through the WPS that the employee had not received a salary for several consecutive months.
The onus was on the company to prove payment of the salary, but it did not provide any evidence to contradict the employee’s statements or to prove that he had received the salary due to him. Accordingly, the court ruled in favour of the employee with regard to the wages he was owed.
According to the employment contract, the employee’s total salary was Dhs7,500. Therefore, he was entitled to Dhs132,750.
The Court explained that the employment contract between the two parties in dispute clearly showed that the employee had worked for the company.
According to the resignation letter, his total service period was 16 years, 11 months and 14 days.
As his service had exceeded one year, the company had not provided any evidence to contradict his statements, nor had it provided any proof that he had received an end-of-service gratuity.
His basic salary was Dhs6,000, so he was entitled to Dhs92,733.
In response, the company filed a counterclaim against the employee. It was established that the employee had submitted his resignation, meaning he was not entitled to work the one-month notice period specified in the employment contract. This obligated the employee to pay the company 'notice compensation', which is equal to one month's salary based on the last salary received.
The company explained that it had attached a document in the form of a decision of the Collective Labour Disputes Committee to its memorandum containing the counterclaim.
This document showed that the workers were demanding seven months’ salary and making other requests. The employee was among those whose names were registered with the Committee, and he had received Dhs18,750 in addition to the insurance amount.
This is why the court ruled that the company was entitled to Dhs30,000, which had been paid to the employee in excess. However, the company was only demanding Dhs20,000 for the excess salaries, so the court ruled in its favour for a total of Dhs27,500.