Applicant applied to this Court for “a review of the decision/action of the 1st Respondent” regarding the negotiation process of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). The application
1
was made in terms of Section 89(1) 1d of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01. 1st Respondent opposed the application whilst 2nd Respondent did not file any response. More
The brief facts of this matter are that:
(1) The respondent was employed by the appellant as a bakery checker
(2) On 11 July 2011 he was suspended from employment without pay and benefits.
(3) On 15 July 2011 the respondent was phoned by a workmate to report at work on that day. He appeared for a hearing that day and he was dismissed from work.
(4) On the 29 of July 2011 the respondent received a formal notification of the hearing. He was being charged for gross incompetence in performance of duties and habitual substantial neglect of duty.
(5)... More
This is an application for reinstatement.
Applicant filed an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court on 23 June 2023. The Applicant failed/neglected to file heads of argument in that case which was LC/H/488/23. The matter was deemed abandoned by the Registrar on 9 August 2023 in terms Rule 46 (b). Applicant subsequently filed an application for reinstatement on 12 September 2023 in Case Number LC/H/694/23. The matter was heard on 12 March 2024 with the result that the matter was struck off the roll because of defective documents filed with that application. More
In a Notice issued on 9 August 2023, Applicant’s application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court was deemed abandoned by the Registrar in terms of Rule 46 (b) of the Labour Court Rules, 2017. This is therefore an application for reinstatement of the application. More
This is a consolidated matter, an appeal against an arbitral award and a review of the same award. The two matters were filed separately under case numbers LC/H/496/11 and LC/H/489/11. An application for the consolidation of both matters was made. This Court granted the application.
The background to this case is as follows:
The Respondent was employed by Appellant as Information and Documentation Officer on a contract for a period of three (3) years from July 2002. The contract was to expire on 12 July 2005. On the 29th of July 2005 Appellant wrote to Respondent advising him that the... More
