On 17 August 2015 at Harare, Arbitrator J Ndomene issued an arbitration award. He dismissed appellant’s application for rescission of an earlier award. Appellant then appealed to this court against the award. Respondent opposed the appeal. More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award wherein the Learned Arbitrator ordered the appellant to reinstate the respondent with no loss of salary with an alternative order for damages should reinstatementbe no longer possible.
The facts of this matter are as follows:
The appellant company’s managerial employees formed a union called the Managerial Credit Union (MCU). The respondent was chairman of that union. It had its own constitution which governed its operations. The appellant was MCU’s guarantor with their bankers, CBZ Bank. Its (the appellant’s) Chief Executive Officer (CEO) was the patron of MCU. The respondent abused the union’s... More
This is an application for ‘an order’. The draft is couched as follows:
“(1) The application for quantification in United States Dollars be and is hereby granted.
(2) The Respondent is hereby ordered to pay the Retrenchees as follows:
(a) Innocencia C. Chitauro US$10 663-38
(b) Cosmas Chitauro US$2 793-36
(c) Respondent to pay costs of suit.”
The application is opposed.
In 2005 the present respondent filed an appeal with this court. The appeal was dismissed in judgment LC/H/70/2005.
At the time that the judgment was granted the respondent was trying to resile from an agreement it had entered with... More
The applicant seeks an order for stay of execution of the arbitral award of Honourable Dzviti issued on 17 December 2015. This is in terms of section 92 E (3) of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01]. The application has been made pending the determination of the appeal filed with this Court under Case No. LC/H/15/2016. More
This is an appeal against the decision of a Disciplinary Authority set up by the appellant.
The respondent was employed by the appellant in a senior position of Mine Manager. Allegations of misconduct were levelled against him. Disciplinary proceedings in terms of the Labour (National Employment Code of Conduct) Regulations, 2006 Statutory Instrument 15 of 2006 (National Employment Code of Conduct/Model Code) (S.I. 15/06) were conducted against the respondent. At the conclusion of the hearing the Disciplinary Authority exonerated the respondent from any wrong doing. That decision aggrieved the appellant, hence this appeal. More
