Applicant was employed by the Respondent as an Engineering Manager. Respondent, initially dismissed Applicant from employment and he approached the Labour Officer. Parties agreed that the purported dismissal was un-procedural and the Labour Officer ordered Applicant’s immediate reinstatement, that is, with effect from 12 May 2023. Respondent proceeded to charge the Applicant with misconduct and a Disciplinary Hearing was set for 30 May 2023. Applicant attended the hearing with his legal practitioners. Applicant’s legal practitioners raised certain preliminary points before the Disciplinary Committee. More
This is an appeal against the decision of the respondent’s appeals committee to dismiss the appellants. The first appellant was employed by the respondent as a buyer whilst the second appellant was employed as a stores controller. On 18 March 2016 the appellants faced allegations of breaching the respondent’s code of conduct. More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award, the grounds of appeal being that:-
- the Arbitrator erred in law
- in holding the appellant committed an unfair labour practice by terminating respondents’ contracts of employment.
- Ordering appellant to reimburse respondents’ money deducted for training when there was no basis at law for such a finding. More
The brief facts are that the Respondents are employees of the Appellant. The Appellant did not pay Respondents 2010 bonuses. The matter was referred for conciliation and subsequently for arbitration. The Arbitrator found that the Appellant had failed to follow the correct procedures in advising its employees of its inability to pay the 2010 bonuses. The Arbitrator also found that the Appellant was at law enjoined to make full disclosure of its financial position during the discussions with the Respondents and before the Arbitrator. It failed to do so. The Arbitrator ordered the Appellant to pay the 2010 bonuses. Aggrieved... More
