Erickson Mvududu v Agricultural and Rural Development Authority (ARDA)

Key Issues

• {"issue_text":"Whether the Arbitrator erred in law in holding that the only issue before him was quantification of damages","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Respondent's letter of 4 February 2010 indicating no reinstatement"}
• {"issue_text":"Whether the Arbitrator erred in not making determination as to date of termination where reinstatement was no longer possible","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Effective date of termination when reinstatement not possible"}
• {"issue_text":"Whether the Arbitrator erred in holding correct salary rate to be $1,009.00","issue_type":"fact","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Salary rate evidence presented by both parties"}
• {"issue_text":"Whether the Arbitrator erred in not awarding contractual benefits and entitlements","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Claims for housing allowance, business allowance, entertainment allowance, rotation allowance, clothing allowance"}
• {"issue_text":"Whether the Arbitrator erred in awarding punitive damages","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Evidence of irretrievable breakdown of employer-employee relationship"}
• {"issue_text":"Whether the Arbitrator erred in not deducting amounts admitted to be owed","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Claims by Respondent for amounts owed by Appellant"}

Background