• W Fassil


One of the controversies in the interpretation of labour law is the determination of the duration in contract of employment. The Ethiopian labour law seemingly adopts the presumption of ‘indefinite period’ of engagement for all labour contracts. The burden is then on the employer to prove otherwise i.e. recruitments for definite period or piece work. This case comment drills on the effect of phaseout of project works on labour contract attached to it. The Federal Supreme Court Cassation Division passed precedence ruling that labour contracts would terminate resulting dismissal of employees where a project work phases out on its File No. 57337 rendered on June 15/2003 (Ethiopian Calendar) and File No. 35621 October 11/2001 (Ethiopian Calendar). The comment is made on these files claiming that the employer must be compelled to prove its endeavors exhausting all possibilities and failure to transfer the employee to another post or projects even if the specific project the employee recruited for ends. The author argues that the very purpose of the ‘presumption of indefinite period engagement’, i.e. job security, should be given effect. More importantly, employers shall not be given discretion to abuse their right to recruit for ‘definite period’ under the guise of project work refuting the protective purpose of the labour law.

Full text of Article in Amharic 


Journal Identifiers

eISSN: 2305-3739
print ISSN: 2227-2178