Electronic Court judgements

Browse Court Judgements by court

This is an appeal against the decision of the respondent’s Appeals Committee to uphold the decision of the disciplinary authority dismissing appellant from employment. Appellant was employed by respondent. He was charged and convicted of disorderly or objectionable behaviour, that is to say, abuse of office or position. The allegations were that he deliberately abused his authority and power when he instructed his line gang crew members to illegally construct an MV Line to feed house Number 7358 Manyame Park using company resources without the permission of the Senior Customer Services Officer. Upon conviction, a penalty of dismissal was meted... More

A brief background of this matter is as follows; - The applicant who is a Designated Agent filed an application LC/H/LRA/170/19for the confirmation of a ruling he made in a matter between the 2nd and 1st Respondents. - The application was made in terms of section 93 (5a) and 5(b) of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01] as amended by the Labour Amendment Act No.5 of 2015. - The application was set down for hearing on the 10th of June 2020 and I reserved judgment after hearing submissions from the applicant and 1st Respondent’s counsel. 2nd Respondent was in default of... More

This is an appeal against a decision by the Respondent’s Appeals Authority upholding an earlier determination by the Disciplinary Committee to dismiss the Appellantfrom employment. The background facts in this case are as follows; The Appellant was employed by the Respondent as the National Purchasing Coordinator. On the 20th of January, 2012 Appellant was suspended without pay and benefits following allegations of violations of Section 4 (a) and (d) ofthe Labour Act (National Employment Code of Conduct Regulation 2006), StatutoryInstrument 15 of 2006 that is ‘Any act of conduct or omission inconsistent with the fulfillment of the expenses or implied... More

This is an application for leave to appeal against a judgment handed down in this court on the 31st of May, 2013. The Application is opposed. More

The Appellant was employed by the Respondent at the Chipinge Depot. When a spot check was conducted on the 26th of July 2012 some cash shortages were discovered. He was then charged under clause 2:4.4.1 of the Code of Conduct. It was alleged that he falsified documents with fraudulent intent, it was alleged that he was using cash generated from the sales of the following day to cover shortages of the provisions day. Appellant was also charged under clause 2:4.6.1 of the Code i.e. “wilful loss or theft” More