This matter has a sad history of dragging back and forth since 2014 with the parties engaged in a series of applications and counter applications but the merits of the matter not being dealt with.
Finally on 17 March 2015 the parties agreed that they had haggled over the matter for long enough and now wanted finality of the matter on the merits. This led to the parties submitting on the merits of the appeal at employee’s instance which is the main matter on the case. Judgment was reserved from 23 March 2015 a date which parties agreed they would... More
The matter has a long and chequered history in this court. The matter was initially placed before this court as an appeal matter under reference LC/H/486/14. The appeal was struck off the roll on the 29th May, 2015 on account of poor citation of the parties. The Applicants after correcting the citation then filed another application reference LC/H/APP/198/2015 for reinstatement of an appeal. The application met with a similar fate. It was struck off the roll on the basis of a wrong procedure having been adopted. Undeterred the Applicants have noted yet another application this time for condonation and extension... More
This is an application for the reinstatement of an appeal which was struck off the roll on 29 May 2015 on account of ill citation of the parties in the matter. The application is at the instance of the applicant employees who submitted that they have now regularised the position by citing all of them employees in their individual capacities pitted against the respondent employer.
Previously the parties had been cited as the workers committee against the respondent employer. The reinstatement application was opposed by the respondent. In that regard the employee took points in limine which it argued should... More
[1]This is a judgment on an appeal and cross appeal arising from a determination by an arbitrator. The following are the grounds of appeal:
‘1. The Arbitrator grossly erred and misdirected herself on the law by misconstruing the concept of prescription of labour disputes in terms of section 94 of the Act which led her to dismiss the point in limine of prescription against the claim raised by the Appellant. More
The respondent is a transport operating entity duly registered in terms of the laws of Zimbabwe. The appellant was employed by the respondent as a bus conductor. His duties included collecting fares from passengers and for such passengers’ luggage and issuing tickets to the said passengers . More
