This is an appeal against an arbitral award.
The respondents were employed by the appellant in various capacities and claimed that as at 7 May 2014, they were owed salary arrears running from November 2010 to December 2013. They then approached the National Employment Printing’s designated agent for conciliation. Failing this, the matter was referred to arbitration.
The terms of reference for arbitration were;
1. To determine the quantum of outstanding salaries due to the claimants; and;
2. Determine when the amounts should be paid.
In defence against the claim, the appellant contended that there was no basis for the... More
This is an application for condonation of late filing of a rescission of judgment application. Default judgment was entered against the applicant employee on 9 October 2019 when he failed to attend court to prosecute his appeal. The condonation application is opposed by the employer whose view is that the applications lacks merit. The test for condonation of judgment is set out in Jansen v Acavalos 1993 (1) ZLR 216(S). More
Respondent was employed by Appellant on 25 August 2004 as a mechanic. In October 2005 Respondent went to work in Japan. Appellant alleges that by the time Respondent went to Japan the contract of employment had been terminated and Respondent had been given his terminal benefits. Respondent alleges that it is Appellant who sent him to Japan to work as a workshop foreman. Respondent alleges that it was a mere transfer and the contract of employment continued with the same terms and conditions as had been pertaining in Zimbabwe. Respondent further alleges that Appellant continued to pay his salary in... More
The matter was placed before me as an appeal conjoined with an application for review. Both matters were opposed.
The brief background to the matter is as follows:
The Appellant was employed by the Respondent as the General Manager of Z.T.S. On the 15th of September, 2010 he attended an Executive Management meeting chaired by the Chief Executive Officer of the Respondent, one DrMafoti. The Appellant was alleged to have committed acts of insubordination and disrespectful conduct towards DrMafoti. The Appellant however initiated a grievance procedure under Part 5 of the SIRDC Code of Conduct on 22 September 2010. The... More
Appellant was employed by the respondent as a controller. It was alleged that the appellant had negligently performed his duties and charges of misconduct were brought against him. He was brought before a Disciplinary Committee which found him guilty and dismissed him from employment. Appellant lodged his appeal in terms of the Code of Conduct. On the date the matter was scheduled to be heard, appellant raised technical issues at the commencement of the proceedings and walked out of the proceedings. The Appeals Committee proceeded to determine the matter and upheld the decision of the Disciplinary Committee. Appellant is dissatisfied... More
