The appellant was employed as a general hand by the respondent and was stationed at Marondera Provincial Hospital. The respondent charged him with an act of misconduct. It was alleged in a letter dated 18 July 2022 that he was being charged with an act of misconduct in terms of the Labour National code of Conduct Regulations Statutory Instrument 15/2006, Section 4 paragraph (d) which reads “theft or fraud” More
This is an appeal against a decision of Respondent Disciplinary Authority handed down on 28th April 2015.FACTUAL BACKGROUND
The Appellant was employed as Head of Chikukwa Primary School in Mutoko. On the 30th of May 2014 the 1st Respondent levelled a charge of misconduct in terms of section 44(2) as read with paragraph (2) (8) and 24 of the First Schedule (Section 2) of the Public Service Regulations, 2000 (thereafter referred to as the regulations). More
This is an appeal against the decision of the Arbitrator where he ordered the reinstatement of the Respondent by the Appellant company following allegations of a breach of the Respondent’s Code of Conduct. Facts of the case are that Respondent who was in Appellant’s employ as a Finance Manager was sent on paid leave on 5th October 2012 and suspended on 19th November 201 on allegations that he had breached the Respondent’s Code of Conduct. More
On 12 September, 2007 the Respondent was suspended on allegations of contravening Section 4(a)of Statutory Instrument 15 of 2006 for“an act of conduct or omission inconsistent with the fulfillment of the express or implied conditions”of employment. The disciplinary hearing was set for 18 September, 2007. On 18 September, 2007, The Respondent tendered his resignation. He said he had decided to go on early retirement and therefore would want to resign with immediate effect. The last sentence in the letter then said “Please feel free to discuss the Exit Package with me.” The letter was received by the Appellant’s officials on... More
This matter was set down as an application for condonation of late filing of heads of argument and upliftment of bar. It is a case which makes very sad listening.In its pre-hearing discussion with the parties, the court explained to the lawyers then present that, the manner in which the employer had prosecuted its case all through left a lot to be desired especially when it came to the observance of time lines as set down by the rules of court.
The court therefore did not mince its words and told counsel for the applicant that the approach to the... More
