Welcome to Midlands State University Library

Court Judgements



Browse Court Judgements by court
This is an appeal against an arbitral award in favour of Respondent. Respondent was employed by the Appellant as a Class 4 Moulder as from 4 September 2006. Respondent alleges that in January 2009 a supervisor advised employees to stop reporting for duty. He further alleged that towards the Easter Holiday in 2009 the General Manager, Mr. N. Nyemba informed him to report for work. When he approached the Appellant he was advised that the situation had not changed. Again around early June 2009 Respondent alleges he was advised to report to work. On arrival he was advised that the... More

The facts in this matter are largely common cause. The respondents were employed by the appellant. The appellant, due to viability problems, informed the respondents that it was no longer in a position to continue operations of the Mutare Branch. The appellant informed the respondents not to attend to work until told to do so by the appellant. The respondents were informed that they could in the interim seek employment elsewhere. The respondents later took their matter with the Labour Office which office referred the matter to arbitration. The arbitrator found in favour of the respondents and the appellant has... More

The present matter was brought as an application for review conjoined with an appeal. More

This is an application for quantification of damages for loss of employment. The application is opposed. The material background facts to the matter are as follows. The applicant was employed by the Respondent as an Auto Electrician. She was engaged from 2008 to the 12th of July 2012 when she was dismissed by Respondent following a disciplinary process. Aggrieved with the determination and penalty by Respondent, Applicant approached this court with an application for review conjoined with an appeal. More

This is an appeal against the decision of the respondent appeals committee which upheld appellant’s dismissal following allegations of carrying out an act which is inconsistent with the express or implied conditions of the contract of employment in contravention of section D25 of the respondent code of conduct. More