Public Transport Service Corporation v Transport and Industrial Workers Union

• Jurisdiction: Trinidad & Tobago
• Judge: Beckles, P.
• Judgment Date: 06 June 1991
• Court: Industrial Court (Trinidad and Tobago)
• Docket Number: 44 of 1990
• Date: 06 June 1991

Industrial Court

Beckles, P.;

Ashby, M.

44 of 1990

Public Transport Service Corporation

and

Transport and Industrial Workers Union.

Appearances

Mr. V. Gonzales for party no. 1.

Mr. J. Taitt for party no. 2.

Industrial law - Termination of employment — Dismissal for being in unauthorised possession of company's property — Whether dismissal harsh and oppressive — Criminal charge arising out of same facts — Prejudice — Adjournment of matter pending outcome of criminal charge.

Beckles, P.

1 The instant matter concerns the dismissal on 29th May, 1989 of Soogrim Ragoo (the Worker), a Dispatcher employed with the Public Transport Service Corporation (the Corporation), for being in unauthorised possession of property of the Corporation. The Transport aid Industrial Workers Union (the Union) challenges the dismissal as being harsh, oppressive and not in keeping with good industrial relations practices.

2 The matter came on for hearing on January 14th, 1991 and continued on February 15th, 1991 and March 14th, 1991 respectively. The Corporation was directed by the court to commence, anal to lead oral evidence in addition to its written evidence and arguments filed herein on November 28th, 1990. The Corporation closed its case on the 14 March, 1991 at which time the Union was invited to call evidence. The worker then took the stand. It was during the testimony of the said worker that it merged for the first tine that a criminal charge arising out of the same facts in this trade dispute which had been laid against the worker in the Sangre Grande Magistrates' Court, had been adjourned at the request of the defendant worker to await the outcome of the instant matter before this Court.

3 This information raised in the court's mind the problem of the prejudice that would be visited on the criminal proceedings by this Court making a finding based on the same facts, but requiring a different, if not lower standard of proof.

4 In any event the representative of the Corporation subsequently made an application on the 15th March, 1991 to this Court to have the matter adjourned so as to await the completion of the said criminal matter. The Union's representative Mr. Taitt resisted the application and the court adjourned the matter to the 25th April, 1991 for a ruling. On that date the court orally granted the application and adjourned the matter sine die but promised to give its masons in writing at a later date. We do so now.

5 The Industrial Court as a Superior Court of Record enjoys all the powers inherent in such a court in addition to the jurisdiction and powers conferred on it by the Industrial Relations Act, Chapter 88:01 (vide...