May 24, 2017, 11:55 AM
The plaintiffs’ claim is for the recovery of D9,967,752.14 being the total monthly salaries of the plaintiffs for the remaining of the plaintiffs’ statutory work life to the pensionable age of 60 years.
The claim also includes damages for wrongful termination and redundancy, breach of contract and trust, betrayal, and social security contribution based on monthly salary for the plaintiffs of the pensionable age remaining.
According to the particulars of claim of the plaintiffs, the defendants accepted to offer the plaintiffs’ appointment as LE VBI Watchman.
The plaintiffs claimed that after acceptance of the offer of appointment, they served the defendants successfully as LE VBI Watchman without any misconduct, fraud or any dishonesty in the performance of their service delivery to the defendants.
The plaintiffs stated in their claim that the defendants had never complained anything detrimental about the plaintiffs regarding their service delivery and they had nothing adverse against them pertaining their service efficiency.
Lamin Manneh and his colleagues further claimed that the defendants, for reasons best known to them, and contrary to the Labour Act, declared the plaintiffs redundant on 5 November 2011, and terminated their services by substituting the services of the plaintiffs with G4s Security Service owned by British citizens.
When Garba Cham rose to inform the tribunal that he was representing the plaintiffs, the chairman of the tribunal, Magistrate Jobarteh, asked him whether he had the authority to represent the plaintiffs.
Garba Cham answered in the positive, telling the tribunal that he would make the authority available on the next adjourned date.
The defendants were not present in the tribunal neither were they represented.
The case was then adjourned till 27 February 2013, for hearing.