Section 49:

49. Labour Act section 37A (1) – Payment of compensation – Currency— The plaintiff was appointed to a diplomatic post, but subsequently had his employment terminated. The plaintiff brought an action claiming inter alia arrears of salary in respect of days of leave due to him. A question was whether this could be claimed by the plaintiff in view of section 92 (1A) of the Constitution. Also at issue was whether any money owing to the plaintiff should be paid in Mauritius or United States currency. HELD (i) section 92 (1A) of the Constitution relates to compensation for loss of office in respect of future benefits that the employee may have received. It does not affect the acquired or accrued rights of an employee; (ii) an employee who through no fault of his own has not taken leave due to him is entitled to a day’s wage or salary for each day’s leave not taken. New Mauritius Hotels Ltd v Benoit (1982) and Deep River Beau Champ Ltd v Felix (1985) followed; (iii) the Court may give judgment in a foreign currency but may not order a Mauritian national to pay monetary sums in foreign currency. Ramphul v Government of Mauritius (1987).