former employee Mr. Philip Perinchief accused him of wrongful dismissal.

Mr. Perinchief, of Miamea Lane, Pembroke, claims that he was dismissed by Mr.

Vaucrosson in 1990 with only one month's notice.

The lawyer, who was called to the bar in both Bermuda and Ontario in 1985, said he sought six months' notice from Mr. Vaucrosson but was refused.

He is now demanding six months' salary less the one month notice he received.

Mr. Perinchief's lawyer, Miss Clare Hatcher, said: "He knew he could have been dismissed without notice but it is his case that he was not in breach of contract ... he wasn't a clerk or a pupil fresh out of law school, he was a man of experience.'' Mr. Perinchief, who now has his own law firm, told the court he began working for Vaucrosson's in 1987 as the firm's executive director and senior staff lawyer of community legal services.

Although there was no formal system used by the company, Mr. Perinchief said he would fill in the "billable'' hours spent rendering service to clients on their files.

The files were given to his secretary and she would render a billing and asses the files monthly to determine the state of client's accounts.

Mr. Perinchief said problems began when his secretary went on maternity leave and "incapable'' temporaries were called in to take over her duties.

When the company changed its policy and required that daily work memos be filled out and sent to its accounts department, the secretary was incapable of keeping up with the task and Mr. Perinchief said he received notices of the lapse from the accounts department.

On August 23, Mr. Perinchief said that he explained the situation to Mr.

Vaucrosson after he threatened to withhold his pay cheque because of the lack of billings.

"I spoke with him to the extent that I understood him to understand me that once my secretary returned, she would sort the matter out,'' Mr. Perinchief said.

Although no dismissal was mentioned, Mr. Perinchief said he later found a notice inside his cheque informing him his services would no longer be required as of September 30.

And he said that two written attempts to get Mr. Vaucrosson to reverse his decision or at least give him more notice, were refused.

Miss Hatcher said yesterday that there was no allegation her client was incompetent.

And she said he "religiously'' filled out a time sheet in his method of completing his billings on his client's files.

Miss Hatcher said that failing to complete the time sheets was not a fundamental breach of contract and not sufficient for firing.

She said that her client often worked in excess of a five-day 40-hour work week and that should be considered.

The case continues today before Puisne Judge the Hon. Mr. Justice Ground. Mr.

Vaucrosson is represented by Mr. Stephen Hankey.