Insurance Law No. 79 of the year 1975

Insurance Law No. 79 of the year 1975



The Egyptian social insurance system is divided into a number of schemes, each one covering a different type of worker. Regulating these schemes are four corresponding laws, namely Law 79 of 1975, Law 108 of 1976, Law 50 of 1978 and Law 112 of 1980. These laws provide coverage for public and private sector wageworkers, employers and the self-employed, Egyptians working abroad and irregular or “unorganized” workers, respectively. For the purposes of this brochure, we will be focusing on Law 79 of 1975, and will provide an overview of the other laws when appropriate.

Law 79 of 1975 outlines the general scheme for the social insurance system, insuring all government, public sector and formal private sector employees. The law makes social insurance coverage mandatory for each and every worker who is 18 years old or more in the public and formal private sectors; and whose age is 16 or more in the government. The law makes employers responsible for enrolling their employees in the system. Employees’ contributions are deducted from two types of monthly wage earnings: the base wage and the variable wage, and the social insurance premium payments are divided between the employer and the employee as follows:

  1. Employer pays 26% of the basic salary and 24% of the variable salary.
  2. Employee pays 14% of the basic salary and 11% of the variable salary.

The current maximum amount for contributions is as follows:

  • Basic salary: EGP 1,012.5
  • Variable salary: EGP 1,590

In this context, a basic salary means the amount paid to an employee before any other amounts are added or deducted, whereas the variable salary is the remuneration he receives as a result of his performance at work.



Foreign Workers

With respect to foreign employees, it should be noted that according to the Social Insurance Law, foreign employees, with the exception of certain Arab nationalities, are not subject to the Social Insurance Law and are not required to pay social insurance contributions unless there is reciprocal duty under a Double Social Insurance Treaty in the employee’s national country. In such cases, the social insurance contributions will be based on the terms of that Treaty and not Egyptian national law. Nonetheless, even if the foreign employee is not subject to the Social Insurance Law, the employer must still pay 3% of the employee’s salary that is subject to insurance to cover the state medical insurance for work related injuries.



The difference between Arbitration and Litigation

The difference between Arbitration and Litigation


Comparisons between arbitration and traditional litigation (or a lawsuit) are frequent. To some extent, these comparisons will depend on the perspective of the individual or company involved. However, in general, arbitration is often viewed as a more streamlined and less expensive method of resolving a dispute between two parties.

For consumers, however, this is not always the case. For example, when a legal issue is relatively minor and doesn’t involve a large amount of money, small claims courts can offer a relatively quick and inexpensive method for resolving a dispute even when compared to arbitration. Having to pay for an arbitrator’s time and the associated expenses, might discourage consumers from making relatively minor claims, although sometimes the costs are shared or even covered.

The difference between arbitrators and judges is important to consider, as well. When someone files a case in court, neither they nor the defending party get any input into whom the judge will be. Judges are typically assigned randomly to a case. However, with arbitrations, the parties often have some input into who will end up being their arbitrator. For example, both the complaining and responding party may be allowed to select from a pool of arbitrators, or eliminate choices from provided options, etc. Arbitrators can also be required to be experts in the field or industry involved in a dispute, whereas a judge may or may not have such expertise. On the flip side, some would suggest that this randomness and lack of selection is a plus for litigation, as judges have no reason to worry about whether they will ever be “picked” to decide another case for the parties before them.

Another potential benefit that arbitration has with respect to going to court is that the proceedings are typically not part of the public record and may have more streamlined procedures and rules. For individuals who seek to resolve their dispute quickly and keep the details private, these considerations may prove valuable. These are just some of the differences between arbitration and going to court, but with the growing use of arbitration in employmentbusiness, and other venues, it is important to be informed about arbitration and related methods of ADR.




What is arbitration

(A) What is arbitration

International arbitration has become the principal method of resolving disputes between States, individuals, and corporations in almost every aspect of inter-national trade, commerce, and investment. The established centers of arbitration report increasing activity, year on year, new arbitration centers have been set up so catch this wave of new business: States have modernized their laws so as to be seen o be ‘arbitration friendly’s firms of lawyers.

Arbitration is one of various methods that together are referred to as alternative dispute resolution or ADR. As suggested by the name, the idea behind methods of ADR is to provide an alternative to filing a lawsuit and going to court, which is the traditional method for resolving legal disputes. Arbitration and similar alternatives were primarily designed to provide for a streamlined and cost-conscious option to deal with a legal issue. Below we’ll take a look at when arbitration is an option, how it works, and how it differs from going to court.

The concept of arbitration is a simple one; Parties who are in dispute agree to submit their disagreement to a person whose expertise or judgment they trust.

They each put their respective cases to this person-this private individual, this arbitrator-who listens, considers the facts and the arguments, and then makes a decision. That decision is final and binding on the parties and it is binding because the parties have agreed that it should be, rather than because of the coercive power of any State. Arbitration, in short, is an effective way of obtaining a final and binding decision on a dispute or series of disputes, without reference to a court of law.


It is easy to see how such a basically simple, informal, and essentially private system of dispute resolution came to be adopted by a local tribe or community -or even by a group of traders, dealers, or merchants within a particular area market. What is perhaps more difficult to understand is how such an elementary system came to be accepted-and accepted not merely in a local or national setting, but worldwide (not merely by individuals, but by governments and major corporations) as the established method of resolving disputes in which millions even hundreds of millions of dollars are at stake Nevertheless, this is what has happened; and the way in which it has happened is one of the major themes of method of resolving disputes.

So, anyone can agree to arbitrate a disagreement or legal issue, but the key word is “agree”. Simply because one of the parties in a dispute desires to enter into arbitration does not take away another party’s right to go to court. Arbitration only comes about when two parties agree to it, either before or after a legal dispute comes up. For this reason, agreements to arbitrate disputes are typically found somewhere in a written contract agreed to by both parties.

(B) How Arbitration Works


Although arbitration is used broadly to describe a method of alternative dispute resolution, arbitrations themselves can take many forms. In almost any arbitration, however, the complaining party will send the opposing party a notice of their intent to arbitrate a dispute, outlining the basis for the dispute. There is typically a period for response, followed by the selection of arbitrators, and then the hearing itself.

Arbitrations are sometimes presided over by a panel of arbitrators, as opposed to just one arbitrator. Regardless, the selection process is typically outlined either in the contract, but typically some type of input from both parties is requested.

The rules of arbitration themselves can also vary widely. In many circumstances, a contract will specify the rules and timelines that will be applied in a dispute. These are typically more streamlined but parties should refer to their contract or the rules specified therein for the exact rules that govern their dispute. An attorney specializing in alternative dispute resolution can also provide valuable assistance in such matters.

In general, the arbitration process involves many of the same components as a courtroom trial. For example, evidence is presented, arguments are made, witnesses are called and questioned by the parties, and so forth. However, many of these facets are simplified or limited so as to make the process quicker than the typical courtroom trial.

Following the required hearings, an arbitrator or a panel of arbitrators will usually deliver a ruling to the parties within a specific period of time. Depending on the type of arbitration, this ruling may be final, or there may be options to appeal.


1 3 4 5