- Appellant was employed by the respondent as its Operations Manager at Avenues Clinic.
- On the 4th of June 2015 appellant was suspended from work without salary and benefits.
- Appellant was eventually charged with theft or fraud in terms of Section 4 (a) “Any act of conduct on omission inconstant with the fulfillment of the express or implied conditions of his or her contract”. The charges were based on allegations that the appellant had encashed leave days in excess of the available leave days and also that she had defrauded the company of US$5 520,00. More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award which dismissed appellant’s claims against the respondent. Appellant was employed by respondent from 2 May 2009 to 7 April 2015 when he was dismissed following charges of misconduct. Appellant was a till operator. After his dismissal appellant made a claim of alleged under payment of wages and non-payment of overtime. The arbitrator dismissed the claim on the basis that appellant had failed to prove his claim. Appellant was disgruntled and filed this appeal. More
The appellant was employed as an accounts clerk in the Ministry of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs. He performed his duties at the Deeds Registry. His duties included calculating stamp duty receipting the monies received and filing documents for registration of title deeds.
Following allegations of fraud in that appellant under receipted public funds received he was charged in terms of the Public Service Regulations, 2000. Five charges were initially preferred against the appellant. More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award.
The appellant was initially employed by the respondent as a general hand in October 2001. He was then transferred to respondent’s Pomona Service Station where he worked as a forecourt attendant until 3 March 2011 when the employment relationship was terminated.
It is the respondent’s case that the appellant voluntarily resigned by tendering a resignation letter. More
This is an appeal against the determination of an arbitrator.
Arbitrator was to determine:
(i) Whether or not the employee was brought before a medical board.
(ii) Whether or not the case is now prescribed.
The arbitrator made factual findings on the basis of evidence before him that the Appellant was placed before a Board (Medical) and was advised to report for duty but that he did not do so. Secondly, the Learned Arbitrator made a finding that the dispute [which arose some four (4) years before the matter was brought for resolution] had prescribed. More
