NASSIM A. NASSIM, Movant, v. ABI JAOUDI & AZAR TRADING CORPORATION, by and thru its President, ELI J. ABI-JAOUDI, Respondent.

PETITION FOR RE-ARGUMENT.

Heard: October 17, 1994. Decided: February 16, 1995.

1. Where a written contract of employment provides for a particular benefit to be given to the employee at the expiration of his contract, but such written contract is subsequently substituted by an oral contract of an indefinite period with the same employer, the employee shall be entitled to receive the particular benefit provided for in the written contract, when he is declared redundant during the period of the oral contract.
2. In the absence of an agreement to the contrary, any obligation, public or private, can be discharged in Liberian coins declared to be legal tender.

From an opinion rendered by the Supreme Court on a crossappeal taken from the National Labour Court for Montserrado County, movant moved the court for re-argument alleging that the Court had overlooked and had not passed upon the issue of the US$10,000.00 given as collateral upon his employment which was still in the possession of management; the question of seven (7) years statutory period within which to assert a claim which he contended commenced from the date of the redundancy; the question of his claim to be paid in United States dollars since he received his salary in United States dollars up to 1985 before he began to receive pay in Liberian dollars; and the claim for air-ticket to his home, Lebanon, he having been declared redundant.
The Supreme Court, upon a review of the records, found that all the points which were alleged to have been inadvertently overlooked by the Court in its opinion, were passed upon except the claim for redundancy pay in United States dollars, the two checks held as collateral, and the question of air-ticket for appellant/complainant to return to Lebanon with his family.

With respect to the issue of redundancy pay in United States dollars, the Court held that Liberian coins were legal tender in Liberia and that all obligations, public or private including the payment of wages, can be discharged in Liberian coins except where there is an agreement to the contrary, which the Court did not find in this case.

On the question of air-tickets, the Court found that the movant had undertaken to provide air-tickets to complainant at the expiration of his employment contract, and that the said written contract was subsequently substituted by an oral contract of an indefinite period with the same employer. Accordingly, the Court held that in as much as the complainant remained in the employ of the respondent and did not return to Lebanon after the written contract had expired up to 1991, when he was declared redundant, the complainant was entitled to be returned to Lebanon with his family by respondent, and that the exclusion by the trial Court of the claim for air ticket was unjustified.

As to the two (2) checks of ten thousand United States dollars, required of the employee by the management as a collateral, the Court held that the said checks should be retrieved by the Court below and delivered to the complainant since it is alleged that they were sent forward to the Ministry of Labour. The Court therefore affirmed the judgment with modification.

H Varney G. Sherman appeared for appellant/ Management. Wynston 0. Henries appeared for appellant/complainant.

MR. JUSTICE SMITH delivered the opinion of the Court.
This case is a cross-appeal taken from the National Labour Court, Montserrado County and was first heard during the October, 1993 Term of Court. The appellant/complainant, Nassim A. Nassim, filed a ten-count bill of exceptions and the appellant management, Abi-Jaoudi and Azar Trading Corporation, also filed a four-count bill of exceptions both of which were argued in their respective briefs resulting in an opinion delivered by the Court on February 18, 1994.

Within the time allowed by the rules of the Supreme Court, appellant/complainant applied for re-argument, which was granted on the minutes of Court during the March, 1994 Term of this Court. The points which the appellant/complainant alleges the Court did not pass upon are summarized as follows

1. That on sheet seven (7) of the opinion, the Court referred to his monthly salary to be $850.00 from 1982-1989 when indeed his monthly salary up to 1985 was $1,300.00;
2. That the Court overlooked to consider in its opinion the US$10,000.00 given as collateral upon his employment which was still in the possession of management;
3. That the Court overlooked to pass upon the question of the seven (7) years statutory period within which to assert a claim which he contended commences from the date of the redundancy;
4. That the Court inadvertently overlooked to pass upon the question of his claim to be paid in United States dollars since indeed, he received his salary in United States dollars up to 1985 before he began to receive pay in Liberian dollars;
5. That the Court overlooked to pass upon his claim for air ticket to his home, Lebanon, having been declared redundant; and
6. That the Court overlooked the fact that the original con-tract was still existing at the time of redundancy; for if the Court had passed upon the point, the award of the Court would have been more than the award in the opinion.

The appellant/management, for its part, did not dispute that the appellant/complainant’s claim for redundancy pay in United States dollars was not passed upon, and agreed that there was a typographical mistake in the opinion with respect to the monthly salary of $850.00 from 1982-1989, but argued that the typographical mistake did not affect the complainant’s last monthly salary of $1,550.00 immediately prior to his redundancy and upon which salary his redundancy pay was calculated. Therefore, it contended there was no harm done to appellant/complainant by this typographical mistake.

Further recourse to the opinion reveals that all the other points which are alleged to have been inadvertently overlooked by the Court in the February 18, 1994 opinion, were all passed upon except that the claim of the redundancy pay in United States dollars and the question of air-ticket for appellant/ complainant to return to Lebanon with his family were not addressed in the opinion to indicate as to whether the Court below was legally correct to have overruled the claim.

In addressing the issue of redundancy pay in United States dollars as contended by counsel for appellant/complainant, the Court says that while it is true that at the time of the appellant/ complainant’s employment in the corporation in the 70s, he was being paid in United States dollars, it observed, however, when the government of Liberia began to mint the five-dollar coins, the United States dollars went from the Liberian market and all obligations including salaries and wages were paid in Liberian dollars. Appellant/complainant, for several years, received his salaries in Liberian dollars without any contention. The Revenue and Finance Law provides that:

“Except where otherwise provides by lawful agreement, the following persons shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and liable to imprisonment up to one year or to a fine up to $1,000.00 or both such fine and imprisonment;

(a) Any person who refuses to accept for the discharge of a public or private obligation or in business transaction, Liberian coins declared to be legal tender;

(b) Any person who demands for the discharge of public or private obligation or in a business transaction coins other than those of Liberian coinage declared to be legal tender;

(c) Any person who refuses to accept at face value for the discharge of a public or private obligation or in a business transaction, Liberian coins declared to be legal tender, that is, as equivalent in value to coins of the United States of America of the same face value”. Revenue and Finance Law, Rev. Code 36:71.5

We have not found in the expired written contract or the oral indefinite employment contract in the trial records, any evidence that there was an agreement to pay the employee in United States dollars in which case, we would have no problem to award the complainant the redundancy pay in United States dollars. In the absence of such agreement as the law requires, we must therefore confirm and affirm the redundancy award in Liberian dollars.

Reverting further to the question of air-tickets for the appellant/complainant to return to Lebanon with his family, any responsible mind will find no reason why an expatriate employee who has been enjoying such benefit to be deprived of the air ticket after he has been declared redundant. Although the judge of the National Labour Court below observed in his ruling that in deed the written contract provided for air tickets at the expiration of the employment contract unless he had decided to remain in Liberia for employment elsewhere, he ruled the claim out without taking into the fact that the written contract was substituted by an oral contract of an indefinite period with the same employer who has now declared him redundant.

In this connection, it is our candid opinion that in as much as the employee remained in the employ of the same employer and did not return to Lebanon after the written contract had expired until 1991, when he was declared redundant, the employee is entitled to be returned to Lebanon with his family by his employer, the appellant/management. The exclusion by the Court below of the appellant/complainant’s claim for air ticket to return to Lebanon after 21 years of service, was indeed unjustified. It is therefore the opinion of this Court that the award as allowed in our February 18, 1993 opinion will include air tickets for the appellant/complainant, and his wife and children to Lebanon. As to the two (2) checks of ten thousand United States dollars (US$10,000.00) required of the employee by the management as a collateral, since it is alleged that said checks were sent forward to the Ministry of Labour, said checks should be retrieved by the Court below and delivered to the complainant.

The actual award for complainant Nassim which should be paid by the appellant management is therefore as follows:

1. The redundancy pay allowed in previous opinion for 21 years of service @ $1,550.00. L$32,550.00

2. The three (3) months leave pay allowed by previous opinions @$1,550.00 4,650.00

3. The one (1) month pay in lieu of notice as allowed by previous opinion 550.00

4. Additional 25% for leave pay allowed by previous opinion 1,550.00

L$40,300.00

In view of the foregoing, the award made to the movant is hereby adjusted and modified to include air ticket for movant and his family (wife and children only) to Lebanon and the return of his two (2) checks of US$10,000.00. And it is hereby so ordered.

Motion for re-argument granted.