BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
The Dubai International Financial Centre |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> The Dubai International Financial Centre >> Nephele v Nishant [2024] DIFC SCT 263 (07 August 2024) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ae/cases/DIFC/2024/DSCT_263.html Cite as: [2024] DIFC SCT 263 |
||
[New search] [Help]
Nephele v Nishant [2024] DIFC SCT 263
August 07, 2024 SCT - JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS
Claim No. SCT 263/2024
THE DUBAI INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL CENTRE COURTS
In the name of His Highness Sheikh Mohammed Bin Rashid Al Maktoum, Ruler of Dubai
IN THE SMALL CLAIMS TRIBUNAL OF DIFC COURTS
BETWEEN
NEPHELE
Claimant
and
NISHANT
Defendant
Hearing : 6 August 2024 Judgment : 7 August 2024 JUDGMENT OF H.E. JUSTICE MAHA AL MHEIRI
UPON this Claim being filed on 27 June 2024 (the “Claim”)
AND UPON a hearing held before H.E. Justice Maha Al Mheiri on 6 August 2024 with the Claimant’s representative and the Defendant attending
AND UPON reading the submissions and evidence filed and recorded on the Court file
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. The Claimant’s Claims are dismissed.
2. Each party shall bear their own costs.
Issued by:
Delvin Sumo
SCT Judge and Assistant Registrar
Date of issue: 7 August 2024
At: 2pmTHE REASONS
The Parties
3. The Claimant is Nephele (the “Claimant”), a company registered in the DIFC, Dubai, UAE.
4. The Defendant is Nishant (the “Defendant”), an ex-employee of the Claimant.
Background and the Preceding History
5. The underlying dispute arises over the employment of the Defendant by the Claimant pursuant to an Employment Contract dated 22 April 2024 (the “Employment Contract”).
6. Commencing from 15 May 2024, the Defendant trained under the Claimant for 2 weeks for the purpose of professional development in pursuit of improving his ability to conduct his obligations as an employee.
7. Subsequently, the Defendant continued working for almost 2 months with the Claimant until he decided that he wanted to pursue his studies and resign from his role.
8. On 18 June 2024, the Defendant emailed his resignation to the Claimant. In response, the Claimant acknowledged the resignation and reminded him that as per the training terms of his Employment Contract, he owes AED 25,000 plus vat to repay 2 weeks training with the company.
9. The Claimant states that he signed a contract that allows the Claimant to recuperate the amounts paid for his training with the company.
10. On 27 June 2024, the Claimant filed a claim in the DIFC Courts’ Small Claims Tribunal (the “SCT”) seeking an order from the court to declare the Defendant’s request for the amount of AED 26,250 for training costs.
11. The parties met for a Consultation with SCT Judge Delvin Sumo on 18 July 2024 but were unable to reach a settlement. In line with the rules and procedures of the SCT, this matter was referred to me for determination, pursuant to a hearing held on 6 August 2024 (the “Hearing”).
The Claim
12. The Claimant argues that the Defendant was fully briefed about the employment terms and conditions, and he willingly signed the Employment Contract. The Claimant, pursuant to the Defendant’s resignation, sought to reach an agreement with the Defendant to pay the training costs but the Defendant refused, and therefore the Claimant proceeded to file the Claim with the SCT.
13. The Employment Contract outlined the percentage owed for early termination fee and the repayment obligations within the first 6, 12 and 24 months from the commencement date of the employee. This agreement is detailed in Clause 17 of the Employment Contract:
“17. TRAINING COSTS
17.1 From time to time, the Company may pay for the Employee to attend practical on the job training (and for which an invoice from the Company Group headquarters to the Company which will be signed by the Company and the training provider as evidence of the training and which shall be available for the Employee's review upon their request). In consideration of this, the Employee agrees that if they resign from the Employment within two years of the Commencement Date, the Employee agrees that they will be liable to repay to the Company the costs that the Company has incurred associated with such training (“Costs”) in accordance with clause 16.2 below.
17.2 Except in the circumstances set out in Clause 16.3, the Employee shall repay to the Company:
17.2.1 100% of the Costs if the Employee resigns and the Termination Date is within 12 months of the Commencement Date;
17.2.2 75% of the Costs if the Employee resigns and the Termination Date is within 18 months of the Commencement Date; and,
17.2.3 25% of the Costs if the Employee resigns and the Termination Date is within 24 months of the Commencement Date, thereafter, no repayment shall be required.
17.3 The Employee shall not be required to repay any of the Costs where the Company terminates the Employment, except where:
17.3.1 the Company was entitled to and did terminate your employment summarily; or
17.3.2 the Employee terminates the Employment in response to a fundamental breach by the Company.
17.4 The Employee agrees to the Company deducting the Costs from the Employee’s remuneration and/or any payments due to the Employee.
17.5 If, after the Company has made any deductions from the Employee’s remuneration and/or payments due to the Employee (or it has not been possible to make such deductions for any reason), the Costs or any portion of them have not been fully repaid by the Employee in accordance with this clause, the Employee agrees that they will repay any outstanding Costs owed by the Employee to the Company within one month of the Termination Date.”
14. In reply, the Defendant argues that the training was internally conducted, and no certificate was issued for the training. In addition, the invoice for the training was only issued upon the Defendant’s resignation.
Discussion
15. This dispute is governed by DIFC Employment Law No. 4 of 2021 (the “DIFC Employment Law”) in conjunction with the relevant Employment Contract.
16. At the Hearing, the Claimant was requested to go into details in relation to the training provided to the Defendant. The Claimant explained that the training was conducted by an employee from their headquarters, and it was conducted for a period of 2 weeks with extensive material provided to the Defendant for him to understand the task properly that was required for his job.
17. Pursuant to Article 21 of the DIFC Employment Law:
“21. Recruitment costs
(1) An Employer shall not request, charge or receive, directly or indirectly, from a person seeking employment, a payment for:
(a) employing or obtaining employment for the person seeking employment; or
(b) providing information about Employers seeking Employees.
(2) Subject to Article 21(3), an Employer is not permitted to recoup from an Employee any costs or expenses incurred by the Employer in the course of recruiting the Employee.
(3) If an Employee terminates their Employment Contract for any reason other than termination for cause under Article 63, and their Termination Date falls within a period of six (6) months from the Employee's date of commencement of employment, the Employer may, subject to Article 57(2), recoup from the Employee such reasonable costs or expenses which:
(a) were directly incurred by the Employer in the course of recruiting the Employee;
(b) are supported by proof of expenditure provided by the Employer to the Employee; and
(c) are specified in the Employment Contract as being payable by the Employee to the Employer in such circumstances.
(4) A payment received by an Employer in contravention of this Article at the expense of an Employee is deemed to be a debt due to that Employee equal to the amount charged to the Employee.”
18. Pursuant Clause 21(3) to DIFC Employment Law, if an employee terminates their Employment Contract for any reason other than termination for cause under Article 63, and their Termination Date falls within a period of six (6) months from the Employee's date of commencement of employment, the Employer may recoup from the Employee such reasonable costs or expenses specified in the Employment Contract as payable by the Employee to the Employer in such circumstances.
19. The Court does acknowledge the terms of the Defendant’s Employment Contract and these terms in relation to training can be enforced upon an employee if the training was done by an external provider and not the Claimant’s own employee, irrespective of which office that employee works, or if they are a dedicated trainer. Although the Claimant argues that this training costs time and money and the Defendant did sign the Employment Contract agreeing to the terms, any new job requires internal training to understand the requirement of the employer to deliver the expected results. Internal training costs are not eligible for reimbursement.
20. External training costs must be presented to the Employee for the sake of transparency, and evidence of the payment of those costs as well as the completion of the training must be signed in writing by the external trainer, the Employer and the Employee to ensure that the costs are recoverable in the event that the Employer is entitled to claim them.
21. Therefore, I shall dismiss the Claimant’s Claim in the amount of AED 26,250 in relation to training costs.
22. Each party shall bear their own costs.
