The Industrial Relations Court Acting Chairperson Tamanda Nyimba has ruled that the Catholic University of Malawi unfairly dismissed an Economics lecturer whom management accused of accepting employment despite knowing she had an impending illness that would prevent her from reporting for duty.
In a ruling delivered on October 6, 2026, Nyimba found that the university violated employment laws by terminating Rachael Ng’ambi’s contract without giving her an opportunity to defend herself.
Ng’ambi was employed as a full-time Economics lecturer in August 2023 on a three-year contract, subject to a three-month probationary period.
According to the court record, she fell ill and was hospitalised at Zomba Central Hospital from September 4 to September 25, 2023. Upon discharge, her attending medical practitioner recommended strict bed rest before she resumed work.
She communicated her hospitalisation and the medical recommendation to her Head of Department, who forwarded the information to the university’s Human Resources Manager.
During her absence, Ng’ambi continued sending study notes and assignments to students. Upon returning to campus, she organised make-up classes, administered mid-semester examinations, marked assignments and substantially covered the prescribed syllabus.
However, on November 15, 2023, a day before her probationary period expired, she was summoned to the Acting Vice Chancellor’s office and verbally informed that management had decided to terminate her contract.
According to the court record, management’s position was that Ng’ambi had accepted the job knowing she had an impending illness that would prevent her from reporting for duty.
On November 16, the university formally terminated her employment, citing difficulties in making herself available for work and stating that departmental colleagues had repeatedly covered her duties.
The university argued that non-confirmation of a probationary employee was distinct from dismissal and that it was entitled to end the employment relationship under its conditions of service.
However, the court rejected this argument, describing the university’s position as “legally untenable, profoundly misconceived and incompatible with our employment jurisprudence.”
The court emphasized that probationary employees remain protected under Malawi’s Employment Act and are entitled to procedural fairness before their employment is terminated.
Section 57(2) of the Employment Act provides protection against termination for reasons connected with an employee’s capacity or conduct without an opportunity to defend themselves.
In its findings, the court stated: “It is uncontroverted that the applicant was not called to a hearing, given prior notice of the reasons for her dismissal or afforded an opportunity to defend herself before termination.”
It further held that meetings conducted after the dismissal could not correct the failure to follow the required procedure beforehand.
“The post-termination meetings on 28 November 2023, where the Acting Vice Chancellor introduced class registers but barred the applicant from presenting student evidence, cannot retrospectively cure an unlawful dismissal,” the court ruled.
The court ultimately found that the university had unfairly dismissed Ng’ambi under Sections 57, 58 and 61 of the Employment Act.
“Consequently, judgment on liability is hereby entered for the applicant solely in respect of the finding of unfair dismissal,” the ruling states.
Ng’ambi had sought reinstatement or compensation for unfair dismissal, severance allowance, lost bonuses and allowances, and loss of future earnings.
The court held that she was entitled to the reliefs sought but deferred their assessment, allowing the parties 14 days to agree on the remedies. If they fail to reach an agreement, the court will conduct a separate hearing to determine the appropriate relief.
