This is an appeal against the decision of the National Employment Council
for the Welfare and Educational Institutions. The grounds of appeal are that;
1. The appeals committee a quo grossly erred and erroneously misdirected itself in finding that Appellant ought to have proved that excessive force had been used rather than that extreme pain and discomfort had been felt.
2. The NEC Appeal Committee grossly erred and seriously misdirected itself in ignoring the extant untested evidence to the effect that the assault by Respondent had caused the child extreme pain and discomfort. A fortiori,
the committee erred in finding... More
On 29th April 2010 the Honourable Y Malama made an arbitration award. In terms thereof she ordered Appellant to either reinstate Respondents in its employ or pay them damages for loss of employment. Honourable Malama made a 2nd award in terms of which she ordered Appellant to pay each Respondent an amount of US$12 065.80 as damages in lieu of reinstatement. More
The judgment in respect of which the application is made was received by applicant on the 4th of December 2013. The judgment struck off the roll, with no order as to costs; an application for substitution of respondent who was then cited as “Anglican Church of St Mary’s and All Saints” with “Church of the Province of Central Africa (CPCA). More
The Deposit Protection Corporation filed the present application in its capacity as the liquidator of Afrasia Bank Zimbabwe Limited. The liquidator sought an order for the impeachment of first respondent’s share repurchase scheme codified under a Binding Memorandum of Agreement executed on 5 September 2013. This agreement was signed by Kingdom Bank Limited, Afrasia Kingdom Zimbabwe Limited, Crustmoon Investments (Pvt) Ltd, Afrasia Kingdom Holdings Limited, Nigel Muranganwa Kudzai Chanakira, Afrasia Holdings Limited and Charles Wawn. More
The respondent in this case was employed as a human resources manager by the appellant.
He was charged with the offence of falsifying employment records of one Robert Mallet by drawing up an employment contract for the said Robert Mallet without using his actual name but using an alias, Robert Matenda.
The employer argued that the respondent’s intention was to conceal the identity of the employee in question who was the then Chief Executive Officer’s son. More
