This is an application for review of a decision by the respondent dismissing the applicant from its employ. The applicant was aggrieved by the following:
i) That no oral evidence was called to enable him to cross examine witnesses; that there was unnecessary splitting of charges; that – the Appellant was found guilty of an offence which he was not originally charged with; that on appeal within the internal process the Appellate Tribunal was not supposed to call for evidence; that the internal review process was improperly exercised. The applicant was also aggrieved by the Disciplinary Committee’s decision to impose... More
On 3rd March 2023 at Bindura, Labour Officer L. Denhere issued a ruling which reads,
“Having considered the foregoing analysis I dismiss the claims for underpayment and non-payment of termination benefits. The respondent is ordered to pay the claimant cash in lieu of for 90 days accrued and give him a reference letter.”
Appellant (employee) then appealed the ruling in terms of section 92D of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01 hereafter called the Act. Respondent (employer) opposed the appeal. More
This is an application for review of a decision by an arbitrator. The decision follows a referral of the matter by this court on three terms of reference as follows;
“(a) Whether or not Fidelity Life Assurance Company had jurisdiction to discipline the Respondent.
(b) Whether or not Respondent was unfairly dismissed.
(c) The appropriate remedy”.
The dismissal referred to is by the second respondent. The first respondent’s
penalty was a final written warning. More
This is an appeal against the decision of Honourable S. Mugumisi that was handed down on 25 June 2015. The award is couched as follows;
“In the result, it is my finding that the 1st respondent had no jurisdiction to discipline the applicant for the reasons I have already given above. It remains the 2ndrespondent’s prerogative to proceed or not to proceed to discipline the applicant through the right Code of Conduct which could be the national employment Code of conduct, if it does not have one registered in its own name. More
This is an application for the quantification of damages due to the applicant employee following his successful review application with the Labour Court in a labour dispute pitting him and the respondents. Applicant is seeking to be paid a composite USD 428 360-01 being backpay from the date of his unlawful dismissal to the date of the success of his review application and 48 months damages in lieu of reinstatement. The respondent employer is opposed to the grant of such relief. It reasons that applicant is only entitled to 6 months worth of damages at the rate of US 486... More
