BROKEN CONTRACT

Evening Post, Volume CIX, Issue 124, 28 May 1930, Page 13

BROKEN CONTRACT

THE APPRENTICES ACT

A WRONGFUL DISMISSAL

(By Telegraph.—Press Association.)

CUKISTCHUKCH, -,27th. May

The Magistrate's Court has no power to reconsider the facts of a case heard by the Arbitration Court, and is bound by the decision of that Court, according to a reserved judgment given' to-day by Mr. E. D. Mosloy, .S.M. , The plaintiff was : Kenneth Birt M'Lelland, of Christclrurch, a motor mechanic's apprentice, who claimed from Tench Bros.,' Ltd., the sum of £50 for. wrongful dismissal. , j The plaintiff "was apprenticed in 1925, and in the' fifth year, of his apprenticeship was discharged by the defendants for alleged dishonesty. Plaintiff appealed j to the Arbitration Court under Section 15 of the Apprentices Act,- 1923, against his dismissal, and the appeal was allowed. On 20th November, 1929,. the plaintiff claimed that he should have been reinstated by the defendants, and claimed £37 10s for loss of wages and £12 10s genei'al damages for wrongful dismissal. The original hearing was on 13th February, when judgment was reserved. In delivering his judgment, the Magistrate said that he was reluctant in coming to the decision to which he had been forced,1 but in his opinion the effect of the decision of the Arbitration Court on the appeal of the apprentice was that it was unreasonable for the employers to dismiss him. This %vas made by the provisions of Section 15,0f tiie Apprentices Act final and conclusive. On the question o£ dismissal' it was, therefore, a claim by an apprentice against an employer who had wrongfully discharged him.

"I find that there is in existence a contract of apprenticeship under which the master engages to take the apprentice as such in his trade as motor engineer for a term of five years from 31st January, 1025. It is a condition of the contract that the master pays .to the apprentice wages at the rate of £2 5s a week during the fifth year of his apprenticeship. The master has by his own act broken the terms of the contract, and must be prepared to pay for such breach. . The defendants having refused to reinstate the plaintiff, the plaintiff is entitled to wages as claimed (£37 10s), as the period at which plaintiff is entitled to become a journeyman has been postponed for five months owing to the wrongful act of the defendants. The plaintiff is entitled to and is accordingly allowed by way of general damages the sum of £12 10s. Judgment for the plaintiff.for £50, with costs."