The appellant in this case was charged with an act of misconduct by her employer, the respondent.
She was found guilty and the employer imposed the following penalty:
“that she should not be promoted to the next grade for the next five (5) years.”
She was aggrieved with both the conviction and the penalty and she noted this appeal.
The facts of the matter are common cause. More
Applicant was employed by the Respondents as a Lecturer at the Harare Polytechnic College. She was charged with misconduct it being alleged that she had refused to comply with instructions to be appraised by her superiors at the College. It was also averred inn those charges of misconduct that she had made false reports against two of her supervisors resulting in their arrest and prosecution. Appellant was found guilty and a penalty of dismissal was imposed. Appellant is dissatisfied with this outcome and has approached this Court for relief. I should also mention that Appellant made an application for review... More
Applicant applied to this Court for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court in terms of Section 92 F (2) of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01 as read with Rule 93 of the Labour Court Rules, 2017.
At the onset of oral argument Respondent applied for upliftment of bar and condonation of belated Response and heads of argument. Applicant opposed the respondent’s application. Respondent submitted that the application for leave to appeal was served on them on 23 April 2024. More
On the 29th December 2023, applicant filed an application in this Court for the review of his dismissal by respondents. The 2nd respondent opposed the application. On the 12th January 2024 the Court dismissed applicant’s points in limine. Whilst the review is still pending, on 9th May 2024 applicant applied for the referral of the matter to the Constitutional Court. Again 1st respondent opposed the application. More
Appellant worked for Respondent as an Acting Plant Operator. He was dismissed from employment for misconduct. He appealed to the employer’s appeals authority which turned down his appeal. He then appealed to this Court in terms of section 92D of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01. His grounds of appeal were initially three-fold. More
