The Civil High Court has dismissed the case brought by businessman John Samisoni against Corporate Management Services PTE Limited, which operates as Hot Bread Kitchen, along with the Minister for Employment, the Minister for Health, and the Office of the Attorney-General.
The case was heard earlier this month by High Court Judge Justice Dane Tuiqereqere, who noted that the proceedings raise significant constitutional questions. He stated, “There was common ground between the parties that if this Court determines that the 2021 Regulations are lawful, then Mr. Samisoni’s motion cannot succeed.” The judge referenced a previous ruling in the case of Fijian Teachers Association v State [2024] FJHC 431, where he had already concluded that the 2021 Regulations were lawful. Although he recognized that the regulations limited certain constitutional rights, he maintained that they were appropriately enacted under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1996 and deemed them justified and proportional.
John Samisoni lost his job in August 2021 after refusing to receive the COVID-19 vaccination, leading to his termination in accordance with the Health and Safety regulations enacted that year. He argued that the 2021 Regulations were ultra vires and invalid, prompting the other parties to seek dismissal of his case.
While various procedural matters were debated, the essential issue at hand was the legality of the 2021 Regulations. At the time of his termination, Samisoni was a shareholder and the Managing Director of the company involved. These regulations, effective from July 8, 2021, mandated that employees be vaccinated to access the workplace. Staff were required to have their first vaccine dose by August 15, 2021, and the second by November 1, 2021.
Samisoni chose not to comply with these requirements and communicated his decision to his employer. He expressed concerns about the vaccine based on his personal research. On August 13, 2021, his employer informed him of the mandatory vaccination requirement per the 2021 Regulations and that his employment was terminated effective August 15, 2021.
Justice Tuiqereqere concluded that Samisoni’s motion for constitutional redress was inappropriate, as such actions are only available for violations of specific constitutional provisions. Furthermore, he noted that Samisoni failed to file his motion within the required 60-day period from the occurrence of the issue and that adequate alternative remedies existed through an employment grievance under the Employment Relations Act 2007. Samisoni contested the validity of the respondents’ motion to dismiss, labeling it as defective.