The Appeals Court have dismissed a claim by CableVision that a tribunal called to investigate the firing of an employee which sparked a national strike overstepped its boundaries.

CableVision said the terms of reference set down by Labour Minister Randy Horton called for an investigation solely into the events leading up to David Green?s sacking ? and not in the days after. Hundreds of Bermuda Industrial Union workers went on general strike just days after Hurricane Fabian devastated the Island last year in protest at the dismissal of Mr. Green.

It was claimed that CableVision manager Jeremy Elmas had fired the technician because he allegedly conspired to get colleagues to go slow on repairs, chalking up more overtime earnings. However, the union claimed Mr. Green had been fired over a joke made by someone else, for which he was blamed.

After three days, Mr. Horton invoked the Trade Disputes Act and then-Attorney General Paula Cox took out an injunction, giving Government the power of arrest over strikers who did not return to work. Union members swiftly returned to their jobs.

CableVision lawyer Saul Froomkin had argued that a deal between CableVision and Mr. Greene, in which Mr. Greene accepted a $25,000 pay off, had settled the dispute. And when Mr. Greene claimed the pay-off had been accepted under duress it should have gone to court rather than to the tribunal said Mr. Froomkin. But Mark Diel, who defended Mr. Greene and the Labour Ministry, said the reference for the tribunal was to examine the circumstances surrounding the dispute and to make an award. Yesterday the Court of Appeal, headed by Acting President of the Court of Appeal Justice Gerald Nazareth, said the words ?circumstances surrounding? had a wider meaning. The judgment, handed down yesterday, said: ?The Minister was confronted by a difficult decision. As Mr. Diel put it, Bermuda was reeling after Hurricane Fabian struck. Essential services were impacted and the entire Island was struggling to recover.

?Mr. Greene?s dismissal had already escalated to withdrawal of labour on a significant scale.

?In those circumstances in which the Minister declared the existence of a trade dispute and set the terms of reference, we think he would have wanted, as suggested by Mr. Diel, to ascertain how a single termination escalated in the way it did for no reason than to ensure that necessary action is taken to avoid a repetition.?

The Appeals court said the Minister?s view had been the same as the judge who had allowed the tribunal to proceed to probe circumstances surrounding the termination. This, said the Appeals Court, had ?sensibly resolved the situation?.

The Appeals Court dismissed the appeal.