Appellant appealed to this Court against his dismissal from employment by Respondent. The appeal is provided for by Section 92D of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01 as read with Rule 19 of the Labour Court Rules S.I. 150 of 2017. Respondent opposed the appeal. More
Appellant employee filed an appeal against his dismissal from employment by the respondent employer following allegations of misconduct. The employer is opposed to the grant of appellate relief as it is its view that appellant does not have a good case on appeal. When parties appeared before the court the employer took the point that the appeal grounds 1 to 6 were review grounds as they sought to interrogate the process leading to the guilty verdict and dismissal penalty so these should have been brought up in an application for review as opposed to an appeal. In reaction to the... More
The applicant submitted that the notice of appeal is served together with the notice of response. In accordance with Rule 15 (2) of the Labour Court Rules the Respondent was suppose to respond within thirty (30) days. The appeal was filed on 12 September 2011 and the Respondent only responded on the 18th of February 2014. More
Appellant was employed as a Provincial Magistrate stationed at Mutare. During a routine check of the Court Record Book it was discovered that sentences imposed by Appellant were suspiciously, the same in different matters that he had handled. The Head of the station decided to refer these cases for review. In a review judgment, UCHENA J. made comments about the sentences and referred the matter to the Chief Magistrate. This resulted in Appellant being charged. The Disciplinary Committee recommended that Appellant be fined the sum of USD 300.00 and his rank be reduced to that of Magistrate. The Disciplinary Authority... More
