NOVISI ARYENE JA:
This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court (Labour and Industrial Division), which judgment was entered on 31 st December 2019, in favour of Plaintiffs against Defendant. In this judgment, the parties shall maintain the designations used in the court below. That is to say that the Appellant shall be referred to as the Defendant, and the Respondents as Plaintiffs.
PLAINTIFFS' CASE
Plaintiffs were employees of the Defendant University. 1 st plaintiff was a Senior Member of the University and Head of the Library. She had been in D efendant's employment for over twelve years. 2 nd Plaintiff was the Assistant Director (Library Services) and the coordinator of Miotso Libraries. She is also a Senior Member of the University and had been in defendant's employment for more than ten years. 3 rd plaintiff was a Senior Administrative Assistant of the Defendant University and had been in defendant's employment for over seventeen years.
The thrust of plaintiffs' claim as can be gleaned from t heir Pleadings and the Witness Statement of 1 st Plaintiff (who also testified on behalf of 2 nd and 3 rd Plaintiffs) is that, sometime between 26 th and 29 th of January 2018, Defendant invited Plaintiffs (together with other employees of defendant), by text messages and phone calls, to a meeting with the Registrar, the Director Human Resources and the Chaplain of the University. At that meeting, they were informed about defendant's decision to down size its staff. In furtherance of this decision, the invited staff were given documents described as Mutual Separation Agreement, already signed by the Registrar of the University. They were given ultimatum to sign and submit the documents to the Registrar by 2 nd of February 2018 or forfeit all their benefits and entitlements. The affected employees were also informed that their employment would end on the 31 st of January 2018.
It is the case of Plaintiffs that pursuant to D efendant's decision to lay off affected staff after the 29 th of January 2018, Defendant stopped the payment of their salaries and allowances and other benefits. Defendant also wrote a letter dated 29 th of January 2018, to Managers of P laintiffs' Provi dent Fund, informing them that Plaintiffs were no longer employees of Defendant University and requested the redemption of their contributions. Defendant also instructed health facilities (which Plaintiffs attended by virtue of their employment with Defendant), to stop attendi
