This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against the decision of this court that was handed down on 15 May 2015. This court in its judgment ordered as follows:
“1. The arbitral award issued by Honourable G Nashobe and is hereby set aside and in its place the following order is made:
(i) The claim for the payment of 5% outstanding salary allowances be and is hereby dismissed.
(ii) The claim for the payment of the engineer’s allowance to other managers in D3 and D4 be and is hereby dismissed.
(iii) The appellant be and... More
The matter was placed before me as an appeal hearing. At the commencement of this hearing the Applicant (Respondent in the main matter)raised a preliminary point. The point was that the Respondent having filed his appeal against the Applicant’s Appeals Committee to this Court, the Applicant having in turn filed its notice of opposition in the matter (on 12th October 2011) the Respondent then filed its Heads of Argument on (23rd September 2013) almost two years after the notice of opposition. It was Applicant’s position that by virtue of Rule 19 of the Labour Court Rules,Statutory Instrument 59 of 2006the... More
Please take note that the final order on the last page being page 13 of the judgment handed down on the 26th of June, 2024 under reference LC/H/279/24 carries the following omissions;
i. For the purpose of clarity, point number (v) shall be inserted into the judgement as the final point in the order and it is to read;
“(v) The decision by the Disciplinary Authority be and is hereby upheld
in its entirety.” More
This is an appeal from the decision of an Arbitrator who found that the termination of the Respondents’ Contract of employment by the Appellant (ZESA) was unlawful and he ordered that ZESA should retrench the Respondents.
The facts of the matter are that the Respondents were employed by ZESA on three months fixed term contracts. These contracts were renewed for periods varying between 2 and 4 years, on 4 August 2010, ZESA gave notice that the contracts would not be renewed. The Respondents’ were dissatisfied with the termination of their contracts and they claimed that they had been unfairly dismissed. More
