Woman fights case against govt for wrongful dismissal
-
Singapore: A woman fighting a 6-year-old case against the Government for wrongful dismissal, caused drama in the High Court when she launched into a speech and continually disobeyed the judge to stop.
Former civil servant, Linda Lai Swee Lin, is hoping to get her old job back in the Land Office.
Appearing in court Thursday, she read out a prepared one-page statement, ignoring a clearly-irritated Justice Lai Siu Chiu who warned her several times to stop.
The judge also warned of contempt of court charges to Lai who continued reading even as other witnesses took their oaths in the witness stand.
Police officers had to be called in to remind the woman to remain silent.
She eventually did, but not for long.
The hearing continues on Friday.
-CNA/sf -
Think she got some mental problems..
-
knn ppl wan talk cnt ar? nw judge big fuck is it
-
Hard to win.... somemore 6 years already....
-
of course the judge big fuck. the judge represents the arm and extension of the law. who are you?
-
judge is big fuck....unfortunately...being a big fuck and being correct are two different things.
-
One more year and she would be time barred.
-
Why got dismissal?
-
Aug 17, 2010
Govt concedes breach of contract
But lawyers say ex-civil servant sacked in 1998 not entitled to reinstatement and back payBy Selina Lum
A 54-YEAR-OLD former civil servant, fighting her 1998 sacking, finally had her day in court yesterday – with the Government conceding that it was in breach of its employment contract.
But the State’s lawyers argued that Madam Linda Lai Swee Lin is not entitled to what she wants – her reinstatement and back pay effective from the date of her sacking.
Madam Lai was dismissed from her job as a senior officer at the Land Office of the Law Ministry in December 1998.
Yesterday, Senior State Counsel Phua Wee Chuan said the Government admitted that proper procedures were not followed then.
This was because Madam Lai, who has a master’s degree in law, was not informed in writing of any adverse report against her. She had also not been told before her probation period ended in November 1997 that it would be extended.
This went against the procedures found in government instruction manuals that formed her employment contract.
But he pointed out that had proper procedures been followed, the Government would have been entitled to terminate her contract anyway, without giving any reason. She could have been dismissed by being given either a month’s notice or a month’s pay.
Counsel noted that since 2005, the Government had taken steps to settle the dispute with Madam Lai, who rejected offers of an amicable settlement. In March last year, an offer of six months of her last-drawn salary was also turned down.
Madam Lai, now a housewife, has been fighting for a decade with a series of legal actions to get back her job. In January 2000, she started proceedings against the Public Service Commission, seeking judicial review of her dismissal, which she claimed was because she exposed her superiors’ incompetence.
In 2001, the Court of Appeal ruled that the courts could not intervene and it was a contractual dispute between her and her employer – a decision Madam Lai yesterday criticised as ‘egregious’.
In 2004, she sued the Government for wrongful dismissal and, after a string of legal moves, the suit was deemed discontinued when she took no further action. But last year, the Court of Appeal allowed her to resurrect the suit.
Yesterday, the State urged Justice Lai Siu Chiu to dismiss Madam Lai’s suit on preliminary issues. Justice Lai, noting the ‘long journey’ taken by Madam Lai, gave her three days to hear the merits of her case, reminding her that she would incur court fees from the fourth.
Madam Lai also cross-examined her former superior Liew Choon Boon. She blamed him for not telling her that she had got a bad appraisal, but Mr Liew said he supervised her only for the first six months and was not aware of the subsequent appraisal.
-
come on lah............we all know how it's gonna end............
the woman will be sent to jail for sure...............
if only we have more people like her in S'pore...................far too many S'poreans are spineless lah..........
-
i think she got a case....the key question which was not highly drill was why was she fire when she was not inform of her poor performance. It has nothing to do with procedure. If her probation was extended she should have been informed.
She may not get to be reinstated but compensation. Of course in this country the court isn't going to give her what she wanted but maybe at least
-
Originally posted by Asromanista2001:
come on lah............we all know how it's gonna end............
the woman will be sent to jail for sure...............
if only we have more people like her in S'pore...................far too many S'poreans are spineless lah..........
Sent to jail for what? -
Originally posted by Xcert:
judge is big fuck....unfortunately...being a big fuck and being correct are two different things.
QFT. -
No bus hijacking pls.
-
-
if i were some oppressive govt>>>>send her to IMH....label her as a lunatic first even though shes normal....then redevelope entire place shes in into a supermarket......then pay her zero interests rates for all her $$$ in banks.