The immediate former General Manager at Windsor Golf Hotel and Country Club, Vijay Krishna’ V Menon, has now come out to expose how his employment contract was unfairly terminated and his dues never paid.
Windsor Golf Hotel and Country Club have, however, objected to the claims through a preliminary objection dated February 28, 2023, that they are both before an arbitration process and that the court lacks jurisdiction to hear and determine the matter. Mr Menon, however, responded to the preliminary objection by filing a reply affidavit sworn on March 12, 2023, saying that the amount claimed involves terminal dues that were already mutually agreed upon by the parties.
Further, he claimed that the said mutual agreement of terminal dues cannot be subjected to arbitration because it does not give rise to any dispute by virtue of the fact that there was a mutual agreement documented on February 18, 2021, and executed by both parties. According to court papers, Windsor Golf Hotel and Country Club remained adamant and refused and/or neglected to pay him $ 62,418.90 as his terminal dues under an agreement dated February 18, 2022.
He stated in the Statement of Claim that his position as the General Manager of the Windsor Golf Hotel and Country Club was declared redundant, and vide an agreement dated February 18, 2021; his dues were calculated and agreed upon by both parties as amounting to $67,418.90. However, the Windsor Golf Hotel and Country Club made a partial payment of $ 5,000, leaving the sum of $62,418.90 unpaid. It is that amount that he is now seeking to recover from the Club.
Judge Stella Rutto, in a ruling dated October 6, 2023, noted that “my interpretation of the above clause is that matters to be referred to arbitration are all questions in disputes arising thereafter and all claims for compensation not mutually settled and agreed between the parties”.
The judge further noted, “As stated herein, the only issue in dispute is payment of the claimant’s terminal dues pursuant to their agreement dated February 18, 2018, which I have reproduced herein”. The judge again noted that the compensation payable to him following the termination of his employment was a matter that both parties had mutually agreed on, as evidenced by the letter dated February 18, 2021.
She noted, “There is no dispute to be referred to arbitration within the arbitration clause in the letter of offer of employment. In light of the above, I am inclined to decline the respondent’s preliminary objection dated February 28, 2023”.
