Welcome to Midlands State University Library

Court Judgements



Browse Court Judgements by court
This is an application for condonation for late filing an application for review. It is opposed. At the commencement of the proceedings the Court drew the applicant’s attention to the terms of the draft order. More

This is an appeal against the decision of the Negotiating Committee Appeals Board which confirmed the Appellant’s dismissal following allegations of unsatisfactory performance of his duties at the Respondent company where he was employed at the time of the alleged misconduct. Facts of the case are that on 13th October 2011 Appellant was carrying out his security guard duties at Tiger Transport where Respondent Company had been contracted to provide security services. During that period 2 heavy duty batteries were stolen from one of the trucks parked at the place where the Appellant was guarding. More

This is an appeal against an arbitral award handed down at Masvingo on the 14th of October, 2011. The Respondent opposes the appeal and has also noted a cross-appeal against the same arbitral award. The background facts to the matter are as follows; The Respondents were employed by theAppellant on fixed term contracts. They were employed as Shop Assistants Grade 4 (as submitted by Appellant and rebutted by Respondent) in respect of Kapitano, Davison Gavaya and Cashier grade 6 (Jane Madondo). The terms of office were supposed to expire in the case of I. Kapitano in May 2011, for D.... More

The respondents were employed by the appellant until 3 August 2009 when they were dismissed for absence from work for more than five days. More

On 27th July 2012 the Honourable L.Chibvongodze made an arbitration award. In terms thereof she ordered Appellant to reinstate Respondent’s employment. Appellant then appealed to this Court against the award. The grounds of appeal were two-fold namely, “1. The Arbitrator erred at law in determining a matter which she had no jurisdiction to determine upon. 2. The Arbitrator erred grossly both on the facts and at law in interfering with the penalty imposed by the Appellant, which penalty was an exercise of discretion.” More