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
This is an application for the nullification of the disciplinary proceedings held by Respondent on the 26th February, 2014.
In summary the undisputed background of this matter is that, on the 20th February, 2014 Applicant duly represented by his Legal Practitioner, attended a disciplinary hearing where he was being charged for an act of misconduct. More
Appellant Appealed to this Court against his dismissal from employment by Respondent. The appeal is provided for by section 92D of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01]. Respondent opposed the appeal.
The grounds of appeal were four-fold. More
This matter was postponed sine die on 20 October 2015 at the appellant’s request. It has since then not been resuscitated hence the decision to dispose of it on the papers in terms of Section 89 (2) (a) (1) of the Labour Act. More
