On 31st October 2012 this Court made an order the relevant portion of which read,
“1. The Respondent being barred in terms of Rule 19 for not filing Heads Of Argument, the appeal be and is hereby granted and arbitral award of the Respondent by H.R. Matsikidze dated 27 January 2012 is hereby set aside.” More
Applicants worked for Respondent. A collective job action took place. Respondent charged Applicants with misconduct. Thereafter Respondent dismissed Applicants from its employ.
Applicants filed in this Court an application for review of their dismissal. Respondent opposed the application More
Applicant filed in this court an application for rescission in terms of section 92C of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01 hereafter called “the Act”. Respondent opposed the application. The order in question was issued by Judge Hove on the 28th April 2021. The order reads as follows,
“The application for condonation and reinstatement of case LC/H/LRA/25/90being unopposed be and is hereby granted.” (The underlying is for emphasis.) Applicant’s case is that the order was issued in error. The error being that the matter was infact opposed. The Applicant referred to its opposing papers and Heads of Argument which had been... More
On 13th October 2015 at Harare, Arbitrator T.C. Sengwe issued an arbitration award. He ordered Appellant to reinstate Respondent or pay him damages in lieu of reinstatement. Appellant then appealed to this Courtagainst the award. Respondent opposed the appeal. The grounds of appeal were three-fold as follows,
“1. The Honourable Arbitrator grossly erred and misdirected (sic) on a point of law by failing to make a finding that Respondent was grossly incompetent as charged in terms of the National Employment Code of Conduct S.I. – 15/06.
2. The Honourable Arbitrator grossly erred and misdirected at law by relying on an... More
This is an appeal against the decision of the arbitrator who found in favour of the respondent after a hearing before that tribunal. Most of the facts in this matter are common cause. Appellant’s grounds of appeal are as follows:
1. The arbitrator a quo grossly erred and misdirected himself at law in making a finding that respondent had been unfairly dismissed based on procedural irregularities whichdid not vitiate the proceedings and without alleging that respondent suffered any prejudice.
2. The arbitrator grossly erred at law by failing to remit the matter for a hearing de novo had the hearing... More
