This is a matter in which the respondent was employed by the appellant. In terms of the contract binding the two parties, during the probation period either party could give two weeks’ notice of termination of the contract. At the end of the probation period of three months, the appellant did not confirm the respondent as a permanent employee. In a letter dated 28 April 2011 the appellant gave the respondent two weeks’ notice to terminate the employment as required by the contract. This is also in keeping with the provisions of Section 12 (4) (d) of the Labour Act... More
The Respondent was dismissed by the Appellant. The Respondent appealed internally. The domestic appeal process reversed the dismissal and substituted it with written warnings and an order for the Respondent’s reinstatement. The Appellant employer was aggrieved by the decision to reinstate the Respondent. Before it complied with the decision it appealed against that decision to this court. More
The matters before me are an application for Review and an Appeal. At the hearing, Applicant proceeded to raise the point in limine that Respondent filed its Notice of Response out of time. As there was no application for condonation before me, I was urged to proceed to deal with the matter as unopposed and enter default judgment in favour of Applicant/Appellant. More
This is an appeal from the decision of the National Hearing Committee which committee overturned the conviction and penalty of the Disciplinary Committee.
The appellant charged the respondent of an act of misconduct in terms of the company code of conduct. The respondent was charged of committing category 4.1 offence in that he had repeated a category 3.1 offence when he was still serving a penalty for the category 3.1 offence. Category 4.1 offence is Gross Misconduct. The charge arose from failure to communicate to a client on the complaints raised by the client and failure to attend to the... More
Respondent was charged with four acts of misconduct arising out of an act of unlawful re-connecting telephone lines of clients whom Appellant had disconnected for defaulting in their payments for services rendered. More
