#Article (Archive)

Triple M Lodge claim case resumes

Jan 27, 2012, 12:58 PM | Article By: Adama K. Jallow

A claim of wrongful termination brought against one Marcel Meuldijk, proprietor of Triple M Lodge, resumed recently at the Kanifing Industrial Tribunal.

The plaintiff was claiming D135,969.02, for wrongful termination, which was due to him.

 In her testimony, Julian Mariane, the defendant’s mother, told the court that the defendant was her son and that the plaintiff, Ousman Bojang, was a nephew to her former husband.

She added that she used to come to The Gambia and stay at Triple M Lodge and that she went back to Holland in 2006.

She testified that it was her former husband who started Triple M Lodge, when she had married to him for about a year, adding that the plaintiff, Ousman Bojang, was going to school at the time.

She also said she was the one who paid the plaintiff’s expenses at school, adding that the plaintiff used to come and work at her garden when he would close from school.

The plaintiff promised to pay her back the money when he finished his schooling, she said.

She further revealed that when she got divorced on paper, it was the ex-husband‘s name that was on the paper, adding that the husband told her that the papers could not bear her name because she was not a Gambian.

She added that when divorced, the husband went to the court, but refused her the possession of Triple M Lodge, adding that the court declared her the owner of Triple M Lodge and the ownership was transferred to her and has been in her name, but since she could not have time to be in control of the business, she transferred the ownership of the lodge in her son’s name, who is the defendant.

When she was asked how long the plaintiff worked for her, she replied that he worked only for five months when he finished his schooling, adding that some time in 2001, he was working 6 days per week and worked from 9am to 12 pm and 4pm to 10 pm and was earning D500 as monthly salary for the first year.

She added that the plaintiff stopped working since 2006, but before he stopped, he was paid D500 and then later D650 and D850, which was his monthly salary at the time he stopped.

When she was asked whether something happened between her and the plaintiff in 2004, she replied that the plaintiff came to her and told her that he wanted to go back to school to study accountancy and asked her to lend him some money and she gave him a total of D60,000.

The case continues.