“You must not use a steam hammer to crack a nut if a nut cracker would do.” -Lord Diplock The Doctrine of Proportionality is a general concept in law which is used to ensure the presence of fairness and justice in statutory interpretation processes. First enunciated in the High State Administrative Courts in Germany in the late 19th century to review the actions of the police, this doctrine has its application in several branches of law. For instance, in Constitutional law, it keeps a balance between the restriction imposed by a corrective measure and the severity of the nature of the prohibited act. Within Criminal Law, …show more content…
Whenever a restriction is imposed on the Fundamental Rights of a person, it has to go through the test of reasonability. For this purpose, the Indian Courts have always used the Doctrine of Proportionality. However, whether the Doctrine of Proportionality can be applied where Fundamental Rights are not involved is still not certain. In the case Union of India v. G. Ganayutham , the Court left this question open. Union of India v. G. Ganayutham In this case, the Respondent was working as the Superintendent of Central Excise. He was subjected to a punishment of withholding 50% of the pension and 50% of his gratuity. A writ petition was filed in the High Court which was later moved to the Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal held the punishment to be too severe. Again an appeal was made to the Supreme Court. The Court set aside the order of the Tribunal saying that the original punishment was not found to be too severe when the Wednesbury Test was applied to it and hence, it was rational and reasonable. This Court observed that: "The applicability of doctrine of proportionality even in administrative law sphere is yet a debatable issue." APPLICATION OF …show more content…
v. Workmen In this case, some workers had remained absent treating a particular day as holiday. On ground of misconduct, these workers were dismissed from service. The Supreme Court observed that the absence could have been treated as leave without pay. The workman might have been warned and fined. Court further said, “it is impossible to think that any reasonable employer would have imposed the extreme punishment of dismissal on its entire permanent staff in this matter”. Ranjit Thakur v. Union of India & Ors. The appellant was a signal man in the Signal Regiment of the Armed Services. He was serving out a sentence of 28 days rigorous imprisonment imposed on him by the Commanding officer of the Regiment for violating norms for presenting representations to higher officers. He was alleged to have committed another offence by refusing to eat his food on March 29, 1985 when ordered to do so. He was charged under section 41(2) of the Army Act, 1950 for disobeying a lawful command given by his superior officer. A sentence of rigorous imprisonment for one year was imposed by a Summary Court Martial. He was removed to the civil prison and he served out the
The concept of proportionality of an intervention as stated by Walzer, must be balanced insofar as the intervention is as much like a nonintervention as possible and should be treated as a rescue of the affected persons. For example, treating a genocide with a genocide of the oppressors would defy the concept of proportionality. In once case the goal is balance, and in the other it is rescue. This therefore is stating that no political prerogatives should be taken on behalf of the intervening state as this suggests that ulterior motives were the goal from the
Employees can be absent from work either due to Long-term sickness, short-term certified or uncertified sickness or unauthorised absence and lateness. Absenteeism will not include annual leave , maternity, compassionate or absence due to training or attending union meetings but where a worker fails to turn up at work as scheduled resulting in disruption of work schedule, added work load, increased payroll costs and poor quality service an d poor staff morale.
The Decisions of the House of Lords in the Case of R vs. Special Adjudicator
Schwartz, Bryan. "Proportional Representation for Canada." Manitoba Law Journal 28.2 (2001): 133. Web. 14 Mar. 2014.
Fairness Doctrine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. (2011, January 15). Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved February 4, 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine
(b) Whether the person first became aware of the dismissal after it had taken effect; and
In this report, the possible reasons for employee absenteeism being covered are that the workplace roster may not be flexible enough, the staff could possibly be not receiving a sufficient amount of vacation leave from the company, and also some staff may not be feeling mentally capable of attending work on certain days. These points will be supported in sources from peer-reviewed journal articles.
Mason, The Hon Sir A, 1988, ‘The use and abuse of precedent’, Australian Bar Review, vol. 4, no.1, pp. 93.
Research has shown that between; 1/3 to 2/3 of all claims of illness, for lost work days are disingenuous. In addition, half of the days taken off are spent other matters other than illness. This matter translates to two out of every three employees. The resulting effect of absenteeism is companies losing money and the tightening of the loopholes employees use as excuses including genuine forgivable excuses.
This case is an appeal against the decision of the High Court judge (“the Judge”) in Suit No 290 of 2011 (“Suit 290”) concerning an action in passing off ^([2]).
Robert N. Clinton, ‘Judges Must Make Law: A Realistic Appraisal of the Judicial Function in a Democratic Society’ [1981-1982] 67 Iowa L. Rev. 711 http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/ilr67&div=38&g_sent=1&collection=journals accessed 12 February 2012
According to Rhodes and steers (1990), employee absenteeism is one of those stubborn problems for which there is no clear
Payroll department had no way to deduct amount of time employees were late. Instead a letter of reprimand was placed in the employee’s personnel file.
Each of our employees plays an important role in getting the day 's work done. Therefore, each employee is expected to be at his/her workstation on time each day. Absenteeism or tardiness, even for good reasons, is disruptive of our operations and interferes with our ability to satisfy our customers’ needs. Therefore, any absenteeism or tardiness can result in discipline or immediate discharge.
Absenteeism, however, usually has different meanings for employers and employees. From an employer’s perspective absenteeism is a huge problem as it impacts on productivity, puts pressure on those employees who are at work, highlights the health and safety problems in some workplaces, and could lead to loss of revenue. Are all absences bad for an organisation? Robins, (1996) argues that at times absenteeism could be to the advantage of an organisation when an employee’s productivity could be below standard due to fatigue which could have safety implications. In this case we need to consider persons who should be a...