An action to recover $2,500 damages for wrongful dismissal was heard at H. M. Supreme Court on Tuesday before his Sionour Judge Grain, plaintiti beg alr, Ernest Beddalll, and defendants the Shanghai Dock & Engineering Ca., Ld.
According to the statement of claim, plaintiff was employed as a foreman smp-builder, plater and frame setter, under an agreement dated Uctober 26, 1918. This agreement provided for a deposit of $500, to be deducted from his salary at the rate of $25 per month, the amount to be held as a guarantee for the proper fulfilment of the contract, and repayable with 5 per cent. interest. Plaintiff was to receive £40 a month, and $450 in lieu of return passage money on satisfactory completion of the contract. By a letter dated June 29, 1921, defendants wrongfully dismissed plaintiff. Defendants paid him arrears of salary up to that date, and the $500 guarantee fund, but he re-revived nothing in respect of salary from that date, or return passage, or bonus for the year ended April 30, or in respect of £250 payable under a penalty clause applicable to either party.
In their statement of defence, defendants said that, on the termination of his services, plaintiff agreed to accept Ts. 627.45 and $1,424.99 in full and entire satisfaction of all claims whatsoever against defendants. In the alternative, defendants pleaded that plaintiff misconducted himself in their service by repeatedly absenting himself from work without permission or reasonable excuse, and without any notification and/or sufficient and proper notification to defendants, who, therefore, discharged him.
Mr. R. G. MacDonald_ appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. H. Lipson Ward for defendants.
Atsence THroven Sicknre:
In opening the plaintiff's case, Mr. MacDonald first gave some particulars of his client's experience, saying that he had been engaged with some of the best firms and had the highest testimonials. He arrived in Shanghai in January, 1919, and was told by Mr. Burns that he would have to live on the works at Pootung. He went there, and on seeing what the conditions were, he neanen epee cette slete was compelled to go outside, eventually going back to live on the premises. His hours of work were from 7 am. until noon and 2 till 5, he had no Saturday afternoons off, and on Sunday he was required work for two hours or more.
His living accommodation consisted of two rooms attached to the
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.