It is common ground that the plaintiff was at all material times a medical prac-titioner in the service of the defendant corporation; that, on February 17, 1970 (a public holiday) the plaintiff was “on call” (which meant that he did not have to be in the hospital all the time but could be sent for at any time there was an “emer-gency case”); that, after a staff nurse had sent for him and later the Principal Medi¬cal Officer had written a letter summoning him to come to the hospital to attend to patients with various types of serious illness, the plaintiff did not come up on the ground that he was himself too ill to travel from his home; that, on February 18, 1970, the Principal Medical Officer, Dr. Ephraim, purported by a telegram to sus¬pend the plaintiff “from duty on half-pay forthwith till further notice for disobedience of official instruction”, that, on the same day, Dr. Ephraim informed the plaintiff of his suspension by letter and also wrote to give the same information to the General Manager to inform and request approval from the Statutory Corporation Service Commission which, on February 21, 1970, replied approving the suspension; and that, after studying all the relevant papers submitted to it by the defendant corpor¬ation, the Commission directed the immediate recall of the plaintiff but on a re¬duced salary (from £2.200 per annum to £1890 per annum) for one year with effect from May 21, 1970. A copy of this last letter from the Commission was never re¬ceived by the plaintiff who, therefore, instituted the present action against the de¬fendant corporation. The plaintiff claims that he was ill on February 17, 1970 and that he could not make a telephone call that day as this was not contra¬dicted by the defendant, the learned that judge found both to be true. He also found that the Statutory Corporation Service Commission could not validly dele¬gate to the defendant corporation their disciplinary power over the plaintiff.

He accordingly granted all the plaintiff’s claims as per his writ, including the award to him of £1,000 as general damages. From this decision, the defendant corporation has appealed to this Court