At the onset of the appeal the respondent raised points in limine. In response to the same appellant indicated to the court that he had preliminary points to raise before he could respond to the points by the respondent. In that regard the court allowed that the appellant addresses it first on the points that it has. The appellant took 3 points in that the form used did not bear the inscription LC 2, that the response and the Heads of Argument are out of time by about 2 months. The respondent conceded the omissions but sought the court’s indulgence... More
This is an application for review.
The background is that the applicant was employed by the Respondent before charges of non-compliance with established procedures/standing instructions, making false report or giving false statement or evidence, and neglect of duty were levelled against him. More
This is an appeal against the decision of the respondent’s appeals officer, who upheld the appellant’s dismissal from the respondent’s employment. More
The grounds of appeal were six-fold as follows,
“1. The DA erred at law by failing to consider that 1st applicant was not on a fixed contract and he did not confirm that he was on a fixed contract.
2. The DA erred in failing to consider that respondent failed to prove that 1st applicant was on fixed term contract.
3. The DA erred in failing to consider that applicants substantiated their claims of under payment of wages.
4. The DA failed to consider that there is no doctors’ report which stated that 1st applicant was fit to work as... More
On the date of hearing of this appeal, (26th June 2013), both parties’ Legal Practitioners suggested and agreed that I determine the matter on the documents filed of record. This is in terms of Section 89(2)(a)(i) of the Labour Act [CAP 28:01]. This therefore is my judgment. More
