When this matter came up for hearing, the respondent’s legal practitioner argued that the record was not a true reflection of what had transpired during the hearing. More
The facts of this matter are that on 27th June 2012 the Appellant phoned the Acting Sergeant Major and advised that he was not feeling well.
On 28th June 2010 he phoned again the same officer and said he had to travel to Bulawayo on an emergency as his uncle was unwell. Appellant advised his superior that he would be sending a letter.
When the Acting Sergeant Major discussed with the superior Nyamwisa he confirmed that he too had received a similar phone call from the Appellant and that they were waiting for the letter he had said he would... More
On the 31st May, 2013 this court issued a judgment whose order gave rise to this application for quantification of damages.
The order reads:-
“In the result, the appeal must succeed.
The Appellant is to be reinstated into his former position.
If reinstatement is no longer tenable the Appellant is to be paid damages for premature loss of his job.”
It is clear from this order that retrospectivity was not intended. More
The appellant employed by the respondent as a buyer. He was found to have caused the purchase of some equipment without following the appropriate process. In the result the equipment which was purchased cost the respondent substantially more than had the appropriate process been followed. More
On the 16th May 2013, the Arbitrator issued an award dismissing Appellant from Respondent’s employment. It is this dismissal penalty Appellant is taking issue with before this Court. More
