The respondent appointed the applicant to the position of management trainee in human resources with effect from 10 September 2012. It was a term of the appointment contract that on successful completion of the training programme the applicant would be appointed to the permanent position of human resources officer. The training programme was to run for eighteen months. More
This is an application for stay of execution of an award issued by the second Respondent on 30 September 2013. The 2nd Respondent ordered Applicant to reinstate the 1st Respondent without loss of salary and benefits. If reinstatement is no longer an option Applicant was ordered to pay the 1st Respondent damages in lieu of reinstatement. The parties are to agree on the quantum failing which either party may approach the Arbitrator for quantification. More
This is an appeal against a determination by honourable Mambara J dated 30 September 2013. The Arbitrator ordered the reinstatement of Respondent without loss of salary and benefits. If reinstatement is no longer an option damages in lieu of reinstatement were to be paid. The parties were to agree on the quantum failing which either party may approach the tribunal for quantification. Each party was to pay 50% of the arbitration costs. More
The notice of appeal was served on respondent on 28 April 2023. Per Rule 19(2) of the Labour Court Rules, 2017 a Response was required within 10 (ten) days that is on or by 14 May 2023. The respondent filed its response on 24 May 2023.
Appellant argued that the Response is improperly before Court as it was filed out of time and without seeking condonation by this Court. Respondent replied that the notice of appeal was served without attachments. They only managed to get all the documents from this Court on 3 May 2023. Then they sought assistance to... More
On 17 March 2023 at Harare, Designated Agent, P. Chiyangwa, made a determination. She ordered respondent to pay appellant an amount of ZWL$34,912,50 in respect of outstanding leave pay. Appellant then appealed the determination to this Court in terms of Section 92 D of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01 hereafter called the Act.
Respondent opposed the appeal. More
