The Supreme Court of Mauritius has dismissed preliminary objections in a fixed-term employment dispute, providing important clarifications for both employers and employees.

The facts

In Ferte G. v Multi Global System Ltd, 2025 SCJ 448, Mr Gregoire Ferte was employed on a fixed-term contract and later promoted to chief operating officer. His employment was terminated before the contract ended, allegedly due to restructuring. He sued for damages for breach of contract, while the employer argued the case should be before the Industrial Court and raised procedural objections.

The Court’s analysis and rulings

The Court held that a claim for breach of contract does not need to use the word ‘damages’ if the loss is clearly described. Employees must choose between a civil claim for damages or a statutory severance claim; both cannot be pursued.

The employment laws do not preclude the application of the Civil Code in cases of breach of contract of employment where an employee is claiming damages for the prejudice suffered. However, an employee must must elect between an action in damages based on ‘rupture abusive du contrat’ before the Intermediate Court or the Supreme court Court or a claim for severance allowance for unjustified dismissal before the Industrial Court as both actions are mutually exclusive.

The Court also confirmed that contractual and tortious claims cannot be mixed. Liability must be grounded in contract unless there is a separate dolosif or penal fault; tort and contract are not cumulative.

The Court aligned itself with established French doctrine, holding that when an employer irregularly terminates a fixed-term contract, the employee is entitled to damages at least equal to the remuneration that would have been earned until the contract expiry date (réparation minimale), regardless of the extent of actual prejudice and even if termination occurs before any performance.

Therefore, if liability is established on the merits, the baseline measure of damages is the remuneration and benefits that would have been due for the remainder of the term.

Key legal takeaways

• Employees must elect either a civil claim for damages or a statutory severance claim, not both.
• Claims for breach of contract do not need to use the word ‘damages’ if the loss is clear.
• Employers who unjustifiably terminate fixed-term contracts risk liability for the remaining pay and benefits.
• Contractual claims cannot be mixed with tort claims unless there is a separate, serious fault.

Practical implications for employers

• Terminating fixed-term contracts early can be costly. Employers should ensure any restructuring is genuine and well-documented, and contracts should provide for lawful termination.
• Offers of severance allowance do not prevent civil claims if not accepted.
• Employers should keep thorough records and avoid conduct that could be seen as a contractual breach.

Practical implications for employees

• Employees should decide at the outset whether to pursue a severance allowance or civil damages, as both cannot be claimed.
• Regarding termination of fixed-term contracts, it is important to clearly calculate the remuneration and benefits that would have been received for the remainder of the term, as this forms the basis of a civil claim

Written by Javed Niamut, Partner and Nawsheen Jaulim, Associate, Bowmans Mauritius