This is an application for condonation of late filing of an application for leave to appeal against a decision of this court as well as an application for extension of time within which to file the application for leave to appeal. More
This is an application for the confirmation of a ruling in the matter between Johnson Mapira and Moreyear Investments Company. The background to the matter is that Mapira lost his job with Moreyear on notice. Aggrieved by the job loss he approached a labour officer who ruled that the termination on notice was not regular as it was not in sync with the law set out in Sec 12(4)(a) to (d) of the Labour Amendment Act. More
On the 7th September 2023 respondent’s Disciplinary Authority (DA) found appellant
guilty of misconduct. As penalty she was transferred from Zvishavane District Hospital to
Mberengwa District Hospital. Appellant then appealed her conviction and penalty to
respondent (Commission) who dismissed the appeal on 17th October 2023. Appellant then
appealed to this Court in terms of Section 52 of the Health Service Regulations. S.I. 117 of
2006. Respondent opposed the appeal. More
Most of the fact in this case appear common cause. They are as follows.
The appellant was employed as a clerk by the respondent council. She was responsible for receipting and banking funds on behalf of the respondent. In March 2000 a home seeker paid twenty thousand dollars towards the purchase of a house from council. The appellant received the money but she did not issue out a receipt. She did not bank the money but kept it in a council safe. The buyer one Charumbira, continuously asked for a receipt but she did not get one. However she was... More
On 26 October 2018 Applicant,qua Designated Agent, made a ruling. He ordered 1st Respondent (employer) to pay 2nd to 10th Respondents (employees) various amounts of money in respect of salary arrears & allowances. Apparently the employer did not comply with the ruling. Applicant then applied to this Court in terms of Section 93 (5a) of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01 for the confirmation of his ruling. The employer opposed the application. The employees supported the application. At the onset of oral argument in this Court the employer raised 3 points inlimine. More
