Unfair dismissal award must state its reasons
The Court of Appeal sent a €33,782.96 unfair dismissal award back to the Industrial Tribunal to give its reasons. It matters to anyone arguing compensation under article 81(2) of Chapter 452.
Mr Justice Lawrence Mintoff, sitting in the Court of Appeal (Inferior Jurisdiction), on 29 April 2026 sent an unfair dismissal case back to the Industrial Tribunal because the tribunal gave no reasons for the compensation it awarded. The tribunal had found the dismissal unlawful and ordered the employer to pay €33,782.96. The court left that finding alone and gave the tribunal 15 days to explain the amount.
The facts
R.I. worked for Mediterranean Aviation Co Ltd from 2016 until the company dismissed him with immediate effect on 4 February 2021. He argued that he was handed a dismissal letter in a meeting lasting a few minutes, with no disciplinary process and no chance to answer the allegations. The company submitted that he had resisted instructions and issued documents without authority.
The tribunal found that he was dismissed without a disciplinary process and without any prior verbal or written warning. It also found that the company opened an inquiry into his alleged shortcomings only after the dismissal. Midway through the proceedings the company offered him his job back, but he had already found other work.
On 1 July 2025 the tribunal declared the dismissal unlawful and fixed damages at €33,782.96. The company appealed on the amount alone. It argued that the employee found an identical role six weeks later and that his proven loss was €3,858 net.
What the court held
The company relied on article 81(2) of the Employment and Industrial Relations Act (Chapter 452 of the Laws of Malta). It also relied on article 3(2)(h) of the Administrative Justice Act (Chapter 490 of the Laws of Malta), which requires an administrative tribunal to give the reasons for its decision. It argued that the tribunal never mentioned the employee's salary, his time out of work or his prospects of finding a new job.
The employee answered that the award was fair. He pointed to a redundancy clause in his contract worth up to nine months' basic salary, his age, the lower pay in his new job and the manner of his dismissal. He accepted that the tribunal had not set out its thinking clearly and that the court could send the case back.
The court held that the tribunal had given detailed reasons for finding the dismissal unlawful. The compensation was a different matter. In the court's words, "l-parti tad-deċiżjoni fejn ġie stabblit l-ammont ta’ kumpens li għandu jitħallas lill-appellat m’hija mmotivata xejn" (the part of the decision fixing the compensation payable to the respondent gives no reasons at all).
The court noted that the award equalled about 10 months' net salary and that the tribunal did not say why. The reasons the employee suggested remained only assumptions, because the tribunal had given none of its own.
The court did not find the amount wrong and did not order a fresh assessment of it. It held that, for completeness and full observance of Chapter 452, the tribunal must explain how it reached the figure. Because the dismissal dated from 2021, it ordered the records sent back at once and gave the tribunal 15 days to give its reasons.
The court allowed the appeal in part on that basis. It ordered that no costs be taxed between the parties at this stage.
Why it matters
A compensation award under article 81(2) needs its own reasons, separate from the reasons for finding the dismissal unfair. An employer that accepts the finding but disputes the figure can attack the figure on that ground alone.
Lawyers on both sides should put salary, time out of work, age and skills squarely before the tribunal and ask it to deal with each. A bare figure invites a remand and further delay for a worker who may already have waited years.
Where it sits
Article 81(2)(a) of Chapter 452 governs compensation for unfair dismissal where the tribunal does not order reinstatement. The tribunal shall take into account the real damages and losses the worker suffered and other circumstances, including the worker's age and skills as they affect the worker's employment potential.
The tribunal's discretion is wide, but it is exercised against those listed factors. A decision that names none of them leaves the parties, and the appeal court, unable to test the figure.
The duty to give reasons comes from the Industrial Tribunal's status as an administrative tribunal listed in the First Schedule to Chapter 490. The company also invoked article 41(4) of the Code of Organization and Civil Procedure (Chapter 12 of the Laws of Malta) and regulation 12 of S.L. 452.18. The court named no earlier judgment and decided on the articles alone.
Source
Court of Appeal (Inferior Jurisdiction), 74/2025, 29 April 2026.