Electronic Court judgements

Browse Court Judgements by court

On 22 October 2015 this matter was postponed sine die at the instance of the appellant. Since then the appeal has not been prosecuted giving rise to the impression that the appeal has been abandoned. In terms of section 89 (2) (a) (i) of the Labour Act the court in the exercise of its many functions may decide an appeal on the basis of papers filed of record. It is in the spirit of the above quoted section that the instant judgment is written to dispose of the appeal which was postponed sine die on 22 October 2015. More

As one of his grounds of appeal, Appellant raised the issue of the use of incorrect Code of Conduct. The ground reads:- “a. We submitted to the hearing committee that we have grave reservations about their employ of the Interfresh Code of Conduct in bringing charges of misconduct against the Appellant. Our reasoning was based on the mere fact that Section 3 of the Interfresh Code of Conduct provides the following. The Code of Conduct is applicable to all employees of Interfresh Limited … Managerial up to Senior Management (B1) and none managerial. Employees in grades A4 up to A1... More

This is an appeal against the arbitral award of Honourable M Dangwa which was handed down on the 30th day of April 2012. More

NDEWERE E.F The Applicant applied for Review of Honourable C. Kabasa’s award in the above case given on 4 May, 2011. The grounds for review were that the award is defective in that: a) “The “award”, does not give a meaningful factual narration and analysis as to what exactly were the issues before the Arbitrator. b) On page 1 of the so called award there is no heading, “arbitral award” which is important and indicative that indeed it is an arbitral award. c) There is no clear cut indication as to what was submitted by the parties to the Arbitrator... More

Respondent was employed by the appellant as a procurement executive. For the sack of brevity the court will summarise the facts as follows. During the currency of her employment, respondent filed certain grievances with the appellant. These issues were deliberated upon by the appellant who dismissed them. Thereafter the appellant instituted misconduct proceedings against the respondent. Respondent declined to attend and the matter was heard in her absence. She was found guilty and dismissed from employment More