Before the matter was heard on the merits the respondent raised two preliminary points. The first preliminary point being that the appellant was improperly before the court since he did not exhaust local remedies provided for in the respondent’s Code of Conduct. The second issue being that some of the grounds of appeal are grounds for review and should be struck off. On that basis Counsel for the respondent urged the court to dismiss the appeal. The application for dismissal on the preliminary points was opposed. Counsel for the respondent’s basis of opposing the first preliminary point was that the... More
Respondent was employed by appellant for five years as an Accountant. She went on maternity leave in January 2013. During the period she was on maternity leave her salary was reduced from $700 to $450. On 6 June 2013 her employment was terminated. Aggrieved, she approached the Ministry of Labour complaining of unfair labour practice in that she was discriminated in the reduction of her salary and was not given notice prior to the termination of her employment. The matter was not settled at conciliation and was subsequently referred to arbitration. More
The parties in this case were engaged in a dispute of salaries. The parties failed to agree on the determination of a new minimum wage for the Industry for the period 1 January 2011 to 30 June 2011. They also failed to agree on a housing allowance for the period 1 January 2011 to 30 June 2011. More
This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against the judgment of this Court that was handed down on the 16 October 2015. This Court in its judgment set aside the arbitral award by Susan Changawa. It nullified the transfer of the appellant to Mahshe Investment and ordered Applicant to reinstate the Respondent’s pension. More
This is an appeal against the decision of the DA who handled the dispute of non payment of terminal benefits to the respondent employees. The background to the matter is that the employees were awarded an 11% wage increment which the employer unsuccessfully challenged all the way to the Supreme Court. Post the Supreme court judgement the employees again approached the DA 0alleging non payment of their terminal benefits. This did not go down well with the applicant. In its view such an approach was tantamount to asking the DA to enforce a Supreme Court order and to issue a... More
