This is an appeal against a decision made by the Minister of Labour and Social Services who had been cited as the 2nd respondent in these proceedings. More
The matter was placed before me as an urgent chamber application for an interdict. In the order handed down on 21st June, 2011 the court granted the interdict as sought. The respondent then sought for leave from this court to appeal to the Supreme Court. More
This is an application for leave to appeal a judgment of this Court to the Supreme Court. The application is opposed. Judgment was granted by this Court on 4 May 2012. The applicant filed its notice of appeal to the Supreme Court on 26 May 2012. The applicant then filed its Heads of Argument on 20 September 2012. The respondent has submitted that the applicant ought to have filed its heads within fourteen days. This is what is contemplated by Rule 19 of the Rules of this Court Statutory Instrument 59 of 2006. The respondent submitted that in view of... More
This is an appeal against the order of a “Committee” of employer representative and the Human Resources Manager.
The brief history of this matter is that Appellant was employed as a Depot Manager. He was charged with four counts of misconduct that is
- Fraud, forgery, corruption, falsification.
- Theft.
- Failure to disclose any interests in a company conducting business with GMB in which one has an interest or influence.
- Any act of misconduct or omission inconsistent with the fulfillment of the express or implied conditions of one’s contract of employment. More
On 11 September 2014 the appellant noted an appeal against the arbitrator’s decision in a labour dispute which pitted him and the respondent employer. On 8 October 2014 respondent filed its notice of response to the appeal. Since then nothing happened to the matter despite the fact that as per the papers filed of record both parties were legally represented. No heads of argument were filed neither was the matter set down for hearing on the merits. The conclusion drawn from the history of the matter is that appellant has abandoned his case. More
