Respondent worked for Appellant. He was guilty of misconduct. He was dismissed from employment. In due course he appealed to the NEC for the Clothing Industry. Through a letter dated 29th August 2011 the NEC relayed its determination. In terms thereof the NEC remitted the matter to Appellant for a fresh hearing. Appellant was aggrieved by the turn of events. It appealed to this Court against the NEC’s determination. More
This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court, against the decision of this Court, where it allowed the appeal by the employee in a matter where the N.E.C. had confirmed his dismissal by the Respondent/employer. More
This is an application for interim relief. It is opposed. The applicant dismissed the respondent. The respondent appealed to the relevant National Employment Council (NEC). The NEC found that the applicant had not followed the provisions of the relevant code. The applicant did not suspend the respondent at the commencement of the disciplinary process. The NEC therefore remitted the matter back to the applicant for the matter to be heard afresh. That decision aggrieved the applicant prompting it to appeal that decision. Before the finalisation of that appeal which has been noted with this Court, the applicant is asking the... More
This is an appeal against the determination of the National Employment Council for the Clothing and Industry dated17 February 2014. The determination is couched as follows:
“In light of the above, the Appeals Board considered it fair to uphold and award the proposals from the appellant as they were calculated from date of dismissal to date of NEC determination and nothing more. Thus the company is being ordered to pay, the appellant USD11 458-30 …”
The grounds of appeal that are before this court are as follows:
(i) The National Employment Council erred at law by awarding damages without hearing... More
This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against the decision of this court that was handed down on 18 December 2015. In its judgment this court upheld the points in limine that had been raised by the respondent and dismissed the appeal. More
