Adam Riley Instructed by Blake Morgan LLP for the Respondent.
JCPC/2025/0029
Mauritius
Luc Guilliey
OCAPAC Mauritius Holding Ltd
Does the definition of “Annual Basic Salary” in the employment contract between the Appellant and the Respondent (and the annex to that contract) violate the End of the Year Gratuity Act 2001 (“EYGA”)?
The Appellant, a French national, was employed by the Respondent. His employment contract was deemed to commence from 1 September 2002, taking into account prior service with another company in the Respondent’s group. By a letter from counsel on 24 May 2016, the Appellant notified the Respondent that he considered the employment relationship terminated by reason of the Respondent’s failure to comply with statutory payment obligations. The Appellant argued that the Respondent had structured his annual remuneration as 13 equal monthly payments to evade the statutory obligation to pay a separate end-of-year gratuity under the EYGA. He argued that the thirteenth instalment was misrepresented as being the end-of-year gratuity when in fact it constituted one-thirteenth of the annual basic salary agreed upon. He brought a claim for constructive dismissal, seeking severance allowance and related payments. The Industrial Court summarily dismissed the Appellant’s claim. The Supreme Court held that the Industrial Court had erred in summarily dismissing the claim, but nonetheless dismissed the Appellant’s appeal on the merits. The Appellant now appeals as of right to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.
28 April 2025
Appeal As of Right
Appellant’s written case
Respondent’s written case
Statement of Facts and Issues
Statement of Facts and Issues
11 June 2026
[2026] UKPC 25
Start date – 30 April 2026
End date – 30 April 2026
Please subscribe here
Please contact us either by telephone: +44 (0)20 7415 7800 or email: clerks@3harecourt.com