Applicant applied for the review of Respondent’s decision to terminate her employment on notice. She prayed that the decision be set aside. Respondent opposed the application. In due course the matter was set down for hearing. At the onset of oral argument Respondent raised 2 points in limine. I shall deal with the 2nd point which I consider as dispositive of the matter More
This is an application for condonation of late filing of Heads of Argument. The facts outlined by Wilson Chivaura reveal that Applicant received Respondent’s Heads of Argument on 12 June 2013. Those Heads of Argument were inadvertently misfiled and were only “discovered” on 5 July 2013. Applicant”s Heads of Argument were filed with this Court on the same day, that is, 5 July 2013 and were served on the Respondent on 8 July 2013. More
The appellant was employed by the respondent. He worked in an area called the “tool room.” He was charged with and convicted for theft.
The facts which are not disputed are that the appellant was found to have kept some 9 litres of engine oil and 2 litres of ATF oil in the tool room. The said oil was not kept in the open but was hidden behind a cabinet in that tool room. When the workshop manager who discovered the oil asked the appellant about the hidden oil, the appellant had no immediate answer. When the appellant was asked... More
Justice Hove delivered judgment on 26 October 2012 in respect of the same parties. The Learned Judge set aside the previous proceedings and remitted the matter for trial de novo. The matter was re-heard and Applicant dismissed from employment. Applicant has once again approached this Court for relief alleging procedural irregularities against the Respondent. More
