This is an appeal against the decision of the respondent’s Disciplinary Committee, which found the appellant guilty of misconduct and imposed a penalty of dismissal. More
The history of this matter is that on 12 June 2015 Mrs Justice KUDYA struck off the roll on application for condonation of the late noting of an appeal by the applicants under Case No LC/H/APP/1008/14. The application for condonation was struck off because the applicants had filed the application for condonation of the late noting of appeal whilst there was pending application to amend that appeal. This application to amend the appeal has since been withdrawn as shown by Annexture “C”. The applicants have now brought this application for reinstatement of application for condonation for late noting of appeal. More
This is an application for review of the determination by the Retrenchment Board dated 13 October 2015. The Retrenchment Board in its determination stated that
“Kindly be advised that the Retrenchment Board has no jurisdiction over disputes arising from terms and conditions of employment.
Please refer the matter to a labour officer as per Section 93 of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01]” More
This matter was set down as an application in terms of section 93 (7) (ii) Labour Act [Cap 28:01] where the applicant was seeking an order to compel the respondent employer to pay him certain money which he believed was due to him following a settlement of a labour dispute between him and the respondent employer. More
The appellant raised a point in limine that while respondent has applied for condonation for late filing of heads of argument the respondent was in fact improperly before the court for failure to file a notice of response. The respondent admitted that they were in breach of filing the notice of response. The issue had also been raised out of court by the court through the clerk as the court wanted to know whether it could be a filing error at the court. Despite this early reminder the respondent had not applied for rectification. In fact the respondent proceeded as... More
