This is an appeal against the respondent’s dismissal of the appellant from its employ.
At the commencement of the hearing a point in limine was raised on behalf of the appellant. The point was that there was no company resolution authorizing one Takunda Timbe to depose to the opposing affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent. The respondent too had preliminary issues for consideration by the Court. These had to do with propriety of the grounds of appeal and the appellant’s prayer. These will be considered after the one raised on behalf of the appellant has been considered. More
The matter was set down before one as an application for interim relief and a counter application for interim determination by suspending the arbitral award handed down on 06 December, 2012. Both applications are premised on Section 92 E (2) of the Labour Act [Cap 28:01]. Both applications were counter-opposed. More
The respondents were employed on fixed term contracts which were not renewed when the contracts expired.
They claimed unfair dismissal and argued that they had satisfied the requirements set out in terms of Section 12B (3) (b) of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01] which provides that an employee on a fixed term contract is to be regarded as unfairly terminated if the contract is not renewed upon its termination when the employee had;
1) A legitimate expectation to be re-engaged, and;
2) Another person was engaged instead of the employees. More
Respondents were employed in various capacities by Appellant on fixed term contracts. The contracts were periodically renewed until 29 October 2013. The number of times the contracts were renewed is not the same for the Respondents as they were engaged on different dates. When the contracts expired on 29 October 2013 they were not reviewed. Respondents approached the Ministry of Labour claiming legitimate expectation for the renewal of the said fixed term contracts of employment. More
