A Labor Court establishes a judicial principle in the regional jurisdiction of Egyptian courts in considering disputes among Egyptian citizens and foreign corporates that don’t have headquarters in Egypt.

A binding judgment against WIPRO UNZA Group to compensate the heirs of an Egyptian worker with 62000 USD, due to being arbitrary dismissed.

The 40th Circuit, Labor Court in North Cairo Court issued a ruling in Lawsuit No. 2979 of 2018 Labor Full Jurisdiction Court, North Cairo on May 31, 2023, binding WIPRO UNZA Group in the Middle East affiliated to UNZA International for cosmetics and it’s headquarters located in UAE, to pay 62000 USD to the heirs of an Egyptian worker as a compensation due to the arbitrary dismissal of the worker.
In its grounds in the Lawsuit filed by legal lawyers and advisors in ECESR, Mr. Mohamed Eissa and Mr. Moustafa Khairy, in their capacity as attorneys for the heirs of Mr. (H.A), the Court established a significant principle regarding it’s regional jurisdiction in considering disputes, as it relied on Articles No.28, 29 and 30 of the Egyptian Code of Procedures.

The plaintiffs’ ancestor had been recruited in UNZA Middle East Company in May 2008 pursuant to an electronic contract, later he got promoted in May 2011 to be the company’s sales development supervisor in North Africa. Then, in April 2018, he received a shocking e-mail from the defendant Company stating that his service had been terminated with a prior notice and without legal justification.

The plaintiffs’ lawyers filled a labor lawsuit suing the aforementioned company, the Ministries of Manpower and Immigration, and Foreign Affairs, pursuant to Article No.19 of the Labor Law which stipulates that “The concerned ministry, in cooperation the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, shall assume the implementation of the international agreements and contracts connected with Egyptian Labour abroad, and study the settlements of litigations arising from the implementations of these agreements and contracts”. The judicial service of process to the defendent Company were given through the diplomatic channel at the Company’s headquarters in Dubai, UAE.

In its grounds, the Court said that it paved the way for its ruling regarding the regional jurisdiction through the provisions of Articles No.28, 29 &30 from the Code of Procedures which stipulate that the Republic’s Courts have jurisdiction over considering cases filed against foreigner who doesn’t have a place of residency in the republic, and in cases, including:
If the lawsuit is related to money inside the republic, or an obligation that was established or ended or must be implemented, or it was related to the bankruptcy’s promulgation.

The court had issued a preliminary judgement referring the lawsuit to the experts’ bureau. Then, the expert’s report was issued in favor of the worker and his right to receive a compensation, afterwards the lawsuit was referred again to the court.

The State’s lawyer represented the Ministries of Manpower and Foreign Affairs. The Company was represented by a lawyer acting as an attorney who presented legal defenses including, the consideration of the lawsuit null and void for not being notified with the judicial process within three months, together with denying the arbitrary dismissal of the worker. The court answered that the announcement with diplomatic channel requires long periods of time and that there is no default from the plaintiff, rejecting the legal defenses of the company. Then, the Court issued a ruling binding the defendant to pay a compensation amounted to 62000 USD to the heirs of the worker as a result of his arbitrary dismissal.

Lawyer Mostafa Khairy expresses his happiness, indicating that this ruling is considered a significant precedent that Egyptian Labor Court established a legal umbrella protecting hundred thousands of Egyptian workers who work in foreign entities that don’t have headquarters in Egypt, giving them the right to access to justice in Egyptian Courts in case any dispute arises regarding their rights in these corporates.

Khairy asserts that this judicial principle will facilitate the litigation issue for these categories through the ability to access judicial recourse which will save effort , and huge amounts of money that were an obstacle in the past for workers to obtain their rights in case of any breaches to the contracts committed by the company.

Regarding the implementation of this ruling, Mr. Mohamed Eissa, the lawyer and legal advisor at the Egyptian Center For Economic and Social Rights, explains that the implementation procedures will proceed normally as soon as receiving the ruling’s writ of execution. The Center will start taking the necessary measures for the implementation according to the provisions of Riyadh Arab Agreement for Judicial Cooperation ratified among a group of Arab States, including Egypt and UAE in 1983 and its amendments. The agreement obviously defined the means and procedures of implementation among the State Parties. In addition, the Legal and Judicial Co-operation Agreement between Egypt and United Arab Emirates which was ratified in Cairo on February 5, 2000, through which both countries recognize the rulings issued by the courts of the other party in civil cases.