{"issue_text":"Whether the respondents were unfairly dismissed","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Contracts terminated two weeks before expiry, no code compliance shown"}
{"issue_text":"Whether accepting terminal benefits waived respondents' rights","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Respondents accepted notice pay but later claimed unfair dismissal"}
{"issue_text":"Whether respondents were entitled to overtime, night allowance and back pay","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Respondents claimed 12-hour shifts, night duties, public holidays worked"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
The appellant employed four respondents as security guards in February 2011 on three-month probationary contracts. After probation, they were forced to sign another three-month contract without permanent status. In September 2011, the appellant terminated their contracts two weeks before expiry and paid for the unexpired period. The respondents claimed unfair dismissal and sought overtime, night allowance and back pay.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases