Q&A – 3 November 2014
Boss forces to visit families
I work in a certain company which operates both locally and internationally. Few months back a new expatriate has been seconded to Tanzania as our Managing Director. This new boss has come up with many changes including a condition that he must visit all his senior managers’ residences and homes. I am one of those managers and feel this is completely a non-employment issue and which is none of my employer’s business. Is there a requirement for the employer to visit employees’ homes? Is there no law that takes care of this? I feel this is an interference on personal affairs.
TP, Dar
Off course what your boss is doing may sound strange in local context and on the basis of what you might have been used to. Equally the labour laws have no requirement for an employer to visit employee’s homes and or residences. Your boss might be doing this as a courteousy as a tactic of getting closer to his senior staff. However from a human resources point of view, knowing where your employees are staying is crucial. It is normal for human resources officers to verify, amongst others, employees’ particulars including residence and physical addresses.
However you cannot be penalised for failure to entertain your boss at your home. Since the labour laws are to ensure harmony at your work place, you may raise this with the human resources office, trade union in your office and/or in the higher chain internally for it to be resolved.
Executor neglects to pay licence fees
Our father passed away years back and appointed his friend as an executor. All formalities on grant of probate were complied with subsequent to the death of our father and ultimately the Court appointed my father’s friend as an executor. Recently we have noticed that the executor did not pay rent in one of the key primary mining licenses which our late father was holding. The license has now been revoked and we’ve been ordered to vacate from the mining site as it has been reallocated to another person. As heirs, is there a way we can sue the executor because we had brought it to his attention before only to find recently that he had lied that he had duly paid the fees. My brother who, is a mining consultant, has already started following up with the Commissioner of Minerals to inquire about the revocation but I want to check with you if we can make the executor also liable. Please guide.
CV, Dar
The Probate and Administration of Estates Act [Cap 352 R.E. 2002] makes an executor or administrator liable for misapplication and neglect which results into devastation of the estate. Therefore when an executor or administrator misapplies the estate of the deceased, or subjects it to loss or damage, she or he is liable to make good the loss or damage so occasioned. Also when an executor or administrator occasions a loss to the estate by neglecting to get in any part of the property of the deceased, he is liable to make good such amount. Thus it can safely be said that based on the facts above, you seem to have a good cause of action against the executor. Very few people know this but persons who are appointed as executors must know that they can be personally liable for their actions.
Car parking disclaimers
I drive a vogue which I love as much as I love my family. I take care of it as being part of my family and in order to protect it, I pay exorbitant monthly fees to park in one building in town with an exclusive parking lot. To my surprise the owner of the building has kept signs everywhere in the building that parking is at the owner’s risk. I am surprised as I pay exorbitant fees for the parking, now do I have to also hire a security company to guard my car? What does the law provide? How can the owner exempt himself from liability while at the same time he demands so much for parking?
KA, Dar
The law of tort requires owners of the buildings to ensure that the buildings are safe for the persons who are invited therein. The owner of the building where you park your car is in the business of renting spaces for parking and also charges fees on every person who parks in that building. Hence he is responsible to take all reasonable measures to ensure that the cars which are parked in his business place are safe from theft or damage.
If the cars are damaged or stolen due to owners negligence or employee’s negligence, he may be held liable under the law of tort. Such signs that parking is at owner’s risk will not exempt him from tortious liability unless he can prove that he had taken all reasonable measures to ensure that the cars are safe and that any damage or theft of the car or spare parts was not due to his or his employee’s negligence.
The signs that parking is at owners risk are usually attempts by such building owners to limit or reduce potential future liability. However such a sign should not deter you to seek compensation from the owner in case something does get stolen or damaged.
Similarly you see such signs in gyms where gymn owners also state that those working out at gymn’s do so at their own risk. As explained above, these signs are just attempts to limit liability.