Gopal Sri Ram JCA:

[1] We commenced hearing of this appeal on 22 May 1996 and continued listening to argument on 23 May. However, as V T Nathan of Counsel for the appellants was unable to complete his oral submissions on 23 May, we adjourned further hearing of the appeal to 12 August 1996.We also directed Counsel on both sides to put a written note of their argument to assist us. Counsel obliged. At the conclusion of the argument on 12 August we dismissed the appeal and made certain orders which we will set out in detail at the conclusion of this judgment.

[2] The brief facts of this case are as follows.

[3] The appellants are all subsidiaries of a common holding company, namely, Harris Corporation Inc which is a company incorporated in the United States of America ('Harris Inc'). For convenience we will call them "the Harris Group". In the proceedings before the Industrial Court, the first appellant was referred to as HSSM, the second appellant as HAT and the third appellant as HSM respectively. We will not follow suit. Instead, we will refer to them merely as 'the appellants' and in the order in which they appear in the title to the appeal.

[4] The respondents are twofold. Th