Ex-Freeport employee awarded Lm4,000

A former Freeport employee has been awarded Lm4,000 (€9,317) in damages after a tribunal ruled he had been unfairly dismissed. Tribunal chairman Antoine DeGiovanni heard that John Sammut - who at the time was a builder - had an accident at work in 1991.

A former Freeport employee has been awarded Lm4,000 (€9,317) in damages after a tribunal ruled he had been unfairly dismissed.

Tribunal chairman Antoine DeGiovanni heard that John Sammut - who at the time was a builder - had an accident at work in 1991. Over the next years, he began suffering from back pains but a number of visits to the doctor indicated he did not have any medical problems with his back.

In 2000, he started working at Freeport as an equipment operator after undergoing medical tests carried out by the company doctor. In February 2006, he was involved in an accident while operating a quay crane and suffered a slipped disk.

Then, in July 2006, he was suspended from work for 14 weeks as a precautionary measure on doctor's orders despite his insistence that he was fit to work. In October that year, a specialist concluded that he did not have any back injuries that would interfere with his work and he started working again in November. In February 2007, he received a letter informing him that his employment had been terminated. Among the reasons listed in the letter, Malta Freeport Terminals Ltd noted that Mr Sammut had fed the company false information during a medical questionnaire he had filled on employment because he had not informed them about the 1991 accident. The company also said there was an incompatibility between Mr Sammut's health and his job.

On evaluating the evidence, the tribunal chairman noted that a doctor appointed by the Freeport had concluded that Mr Sammut had fully recovered from the slipped disc he had suffered in February 2006. Therefore, the company's claim that Mr Sammut's health did not suit his job did not hold.

As for the company's claim that he had misled them in the medical application, although such a thing would merit disciplinary action, it did not constitute sufficient reason to terminate employment.

Lawyers George Abela and Lydia Zerafa appeared for Mr Sammut.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.