Abolishing a job position in the organisational structure of a public utility means to permanently write off the job with all its duties and responsibilities from the tasks of the organisation within which the job in the government entity is included; unless it is decided that such position and duties are to be transferred to another organisation in the same/or to a different government entity.

- Example of flawed substantiation.

Whereas it is prescribed in the rules of the Human Resource Law that the abolition of a job in the organisational structure of a public utility means to permanently write off the job with all its duties and responsibilities from the tasks of the organisation within which the job in the government entity is included, unless it is decided that such position and duties are to be transferred to another organisation in the same/or to a different government entity; and whereas it is prescribed in Article 145/7 of the Human Resource Regulation for ... on 6/1/2015 that: - The service of the employee ... shall end by a decision of the head of ... as a result of restructuring the organisational units or the jobs ... -; and whereas it was established that the respondent used to work in the office of the head of ... in the position of public relations and local communication officer, starting from 25/9/2016. Decision No. 127 of 2018 was issued on 16/12/2018 by the head of... stipulating in the first article that: The office of the head of ... shall be restructured ... and the following job positions shall be abolished 2: The position of public relations and local communication officer, which is the position that the respondent held for a period not exceeding three years; and it has not been proven that the tasks associated with this position have been transferred to an organisational unit within the departments of ... or to another government entity, and they totally disappeared from the organisational structure of .... which has not been refuted by the respondent, hence the decision terminating his service shall be deemed to have been issued based on a legitimate ground, which was not considered by the contested judgment, which constitutes a breach of the law, and this has prevented it from discussing the elements of the case, and thus necessitates its reversal.

The court

Whereas in the facts as apparent in the contested judgment and all cassation documents, the Respondent has filed Lawsuit No. 57 of 2019 Abu Dhabi requesting the cancellation of Decision ... terminating his service, based on the ground that said Decision is illegitimate, and imposing paying him his dues. By way of explanation of his lawsuit, he said that he used to hold the position of public relations and local communication officer in the office of the head of .......... as of 25/9/2016 until his service was terminated due to the restructuring on 2/1/2019 and then he finally requested the cancellation of the termination decision and alternatively imposing upon ... to pay him his dues including the end-of-service gratuity, his salaries and his leave balance. The court of first instance ruled in the session dated 30/06/2019 to reject the lawsuit. On 9/11/2019, the Court of Appeal ruled to cancel the first-instance judgment and ruled once again to cancel the contested termination decision; thus, the appeal was filed and was presented to this court in the deliberation room; thus, the chamber decided to present it in a session, and the court decided to pronounce the judgment in today's session.

Whereas the cassation was based on nine grounds whereby the Appellant objects, in the first to the fifth ground, to the contested judgment, stating that it violated the law and erred in its application when it ruled that the decision terminating the service of the respondent is illegitimate, while said decision was based on a legitimate ground, as the Respondent used to work for the Appellant in the position of public relations officer in the office of the head of ..., which is the position that was abolished by the decision of restructuring and organizing ..., which means that the decision is based on a legitimate ground that is well founded in fact and in law, which was not considered by the contested judgment, thus said judgment shall be deemed flawed and necessitated its reversal;

Whereas the objection is apposite as it is prescribed in the rules of the Human Resource Law that the abolition of a job in the organisational structure of a public utility means to permanently write off the job with all its duties and responsibilities from the tasks of the organisation within which the job in the government entity is included, unless it is decided that such position and duties are to be transferred to another organisation in the same/or to a different government entity; and whereas it is prescribed in Article 145/7 of the Human Resource Regulation for ... on 6/1/2015 that: - The service of the employee ... shall end by a decision of the head of ... as a result of restructuring the organisational units or the jobs ... -; and whereas it was established that the respondent used to work in the office of the head of ... in the position of public relations and local communication officer, starting from 25/9/2016. Decision No. 127 of 2018 was issued on 16/12/2018 by the head of... stipulating in the first article that: The office of the head of ... shall be restructured ... and the following job positions shall be abolished