The Appellant’s grounds of appeal are that the Arbitrator erred when he concluded that there was no constructive dismissal of the Appellant. The Appellant prayed that the Award be substituted with the following;
“Appellant be hereby held to have been constructively dismissed and Respondent be ordered to
(1) Pay punitive damages and all outstanding salary arrears including all benefits.
(2) Should parties agree reinstate Appellant without loss of salary and benefits.”
The Respondent on the other hand told the court that the appellant had not raised any point of law as provided for in Section 98 (10) of the Labour... More
This is an appeal against part of an arbitral award issued on
29 August 2013. In the award, it was ruled that the respondent was not unfairly dismissed. It was ruled that the respondent be refunded the amount of US$950.00 that was paid to the appellant for the use of water and electricity.
It is against that part of the award that ordered refund of the sum of US$950.00 that this appeal has been noted. More
The Appellant was employed by the Respondent as a Cashier. She was suspended from duty on the 20th of June 2014 on allegations of misconduct. The suspension was without pay and allowances. Following investigations Appellant was summoned to appear before a Disciplinary Committee. She was charged with ‘theft’ as defined in the relevant code i.e U.M.P Zvataida Rural District Council Employment Code of Conduct. The Disciplinary Committee found her guilty and consequently imposed a dismissal penalty. Dissatisfied the Appellant appealed internally to the Respondent’s Appeal Committee. The Appeals Committee dismissed her appeal and upheld the dismissal penalty. Still aggrieved the... More
This is an unopposed Chamber Application for granting of an appeal, made in terms of Rule 19 (3)(b) of the Labour Court Rules, Statutory Instrument 59 of 2006 (“the Rules”).
Ordinarily, this is the sort of application that could be simply disposed of by way of acourt order, without the need to write a judgment. However, the factual background to this application reveals some procedural issues that, in my view, necessitate reasons for judgment.
The applicant filed his application on 17 June 2014 under Case No LC/H/APP/249/14. This was after the respondent failed to file heads of argument in the... More
This is an appeal against the determination of the Respondent’s Appeals Authority which determination was handed down on the 19th of May 2023 and served on Appellant on the 23rd of May, 2023.
The material background facts to the matter are as follows. The Appellant was employed by the Respondent as a Loss Control Manager. On the 17th of April 2023 he was notified that, following a complaint by his immediate supervisor, the Respondent had reason to believe he had committed two acts of misconduct namely;
(i) Contravention of Section 4 (g) of Statutory Instrument 15 of 2006 i.e. habitual... More
