Ex-employee let go after probation without one month's notice wins claim against law firm
The law firm had argued against having to pay one month's salary in lieu of notice, saying the man had not been terminated but that his probation period had expired.
In August 2023, a man named Mr Ghui Meng Yang began working for Nanyang Law as a supporting officer with a three-month probation period ending on July 9, 2023. On July 7, two days before his probation period ended, Nanyang Law informed Mr Ghui that he would not be confirmed and that his employment would terminate. The company offered Mr Ghui a one-month salary in lieu of notice, but Mr Ghui disagreed, arguing that a one-month notice period should be given or he should be compensated.
Nanyang Law argued that the end of his probation period did not constitute termination and therefore no notice period was required. Mr Ghui filed a claim with the Employment Claims Tribunal for one month's salary, which the law firm contested. A magistrate initially allowed Mr Ghui's claim, finding that Singapore law does not mandate a one-month notice period for employees during probation.
However, upon appeal, Nanyang Law maintained its position that the probation period is a contract of service for a specified period of time, and that employment should automatically end at the end of the probation period without notice or compensation. The Court of Appeal disagreed, stating that the terms of the employment contract and the factual context should be considered in determining whether the probation period creates a fixed-term contract.
Justice Nair concluded that Nanyang Law's argument was inconsistent with the rest of the terms, which provided for notice periods upon confirmation and an escalating annual leave entitlement.
Written by urgent.news from Channel News Asia's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
