Welcome to Midlands State University Library

Court Judgements



Browse Court Judgements by court
This is an appeal against the decision of the Labour Officer who held that respondent employee was unlawfully dismissed by the employer and that she was entitled to 36 months damages for loss of employment, payment of her leave days and payment of acting allowances due to her. More

This is an appeal against an arbitral award issued on 27 February 2014. The arbitrator having made a finding that respondents’ dismissal was unfair ordered that the respondents be paid US$1008-55 each within a month of the order. More

The appellant is appealing against the honourable arbitrator M Mpango dated 26th day of March 2012. The accused was couched as follows: “The respondent perpetrated unfair labour practices by treating claimants as casual workers after the expiry of six weeks in four consecutive months in violation of the relevant collective bargaining agreement. It is hereby ordered that the respondent re-instates the claimants or pay $1741-00 to each of the claimants as damages in lieu of re-instatement. The respondent is also ordered to pay $4 818-00 to each of the claimants in respect of underpayment of wages, overtime and allowances.” More

Respondent was in the employ of the Applicant. Allegations of misconduct were levelled against her, and she was brought before a Disciplinary Committee in terms of the Applicant’s Code of Conduct. She was found guilty. The Immediate Superior, as mandated by the Code of Conduct, imposed a penalty on her. The penalty was one of a Final Written Warning. The Respondent thereafter continued coming to work. A few weeks down the line, another penalty of dismissal from employment was issued to her. More

This is an application forleave to appeal from this court decision handed down on 20th December 2019. The Applicant having filed its heads of argument out of time and,being, as a consequence of the operation of Rule 26 of the Rules of Court,technically barred, the Applicant filed an application for the upliftment of the bar. The application was opposed by the Respondent. More