The circumstances giving rise to the matter are not disputed. The respondent is employed by the appellant. In 2009 and 2010 appellant issued respondent with uniforms as he was a committee officer. The uniforms consisted of three suits, five shirts/blouses and two pairs of shoes per annum. From 2011 the appellant withdrew the entitlement by just stopping issuing the said uniforms. The respondent used the internal processes to remind the appellant to issue the uniforms to no avail. Eventually the respondent referred the matter to the National Employment Council for the Harare Municipal Undertaking for conciliation which failed to resolve... More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award wherein the Arbitrator set aside the employer’s dismissal of the respondents for willful disobedience to a lawful order and ordered their reinstatement with no loss of salary or benefits from date of dismissal or alternatively award them the appropriate damages. More
This is an appeal against an appeal against the arbitral award by Hon Arbitrator Mudzimure that was handed down on 5 May 2015. The arbitrator had ordered the Appellant to reinstate the Respondent without loss of benefits and salary. More
This is an appeal against the Arbitrator’s ruling ordering Appellant to appoint Respondent to the position of Personal Assistant to the Human Resources Director, following a council resolution of 29 May 2008.
The brief facts are that the respondent is an employee of the appellant. Sometime in May 2008 Appellant advertised a vacancy notice for Personal Assistant to the Human Resources Director which is a Grade 8 appointment. Respondent amongst others responded to the advertisement. She was then invited to and attended an interview. She was placed as an alternate candidate who would take up the post should the first... More
This is an appeal against an award by an arbitrator sitting at Harare. The facts of the matter are largely common cause. These are they. The respondent was employed by the appellant. Disciplinary proceedings were conducted against him. He was found guilty. He was penalised with dismissal. He appealed internally in terms of the obtaining appeal process. Appellant, for whatever reason, never sat to determine the appeal. This was so despite reminders from the respondent. A situation where an employer decides to ignore the plight of a dismissed employee in asserting his rights is unacceptable. Section 2A(1) of the Labour... More
At the hearing of an appeal in this matter, respondent made an oral application for a postponement of this matter to enable the filing of heads of argument, which are outstanding. More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award.
The respondent raised a grievance against the appellant, their employer. They argued that they had been wrongly placed in grade 11 instead of in grade 10.
The issue was referred for arbitration and the arbitrator captures the terms of reference as
“To determine whether or not the complainants were wrongly (graded) placed in grade 11 instead of grade 10 upon their deployment to driving duties.”
The arbitrator found that the respondents had been placed in a wrong grade and each of the respondents was to be placed in the right grade i.e.... More
This is an application for condonation of late application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court combined with an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court.
On 25 October 2013 this Court granted an application for the granting of the appeal in terms of Rule 19 (3) (a) of S.I. 59/06 as respondent in that matter (now applicant) had not filed heads of argument as required by the same rules. In terms of Rule 36 of S.I. 59/06, a party desiring to seek leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against any decision of this court must... More
The respondent is employed by the appellant as a general worker. Respondent raised grievances that she should have been promoted to a public convenience cleaner, that she had not been paid acting allowances when she acted as a public convenience cleaner and that she was entitled to a noxious substance allowance. More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award which reversed a decision of the disciplinary committee which had found the respondent guilty of misconduct and dismissed him from employment.
The respondent was employed by the appellant as a charge hand. In October 2006 he was appointed to be acting superintendent. In 2008 he then performed the duties of assistant workshop manager in an acting capacity. More
This is an application for upliftment of the automatic bar operating against the applicant after failing to file heads of argument timeously. It is opposed. It was also noted that the applicant’s legal practitioners did not file an assumption agency. They should have done so as required by the rules. The rules are clear on this and it is a mandatory requirement. Rule 18 of the Rules of this court, Statutory Instrument 59 of 2006 provides that: ‘’ (1) If a party is represented by a legal practitioner, the legal practitioner shall file a written notice of assumption of agency... More
The applicant is applying for leave to appeal against the judgment of this court that was handed down on 31 January 2020.
The applicant had retired the Respondent at the age of 60 years instead of 65 years. Retirement at the age of 60 years was provided for in the Pension Fund. Retirement at the age of 65 years was provided for in the contract of employment.
This court found that the applicant had no lawful right to reduce the retirement age to 60 years. More
The brief history of the matter is that respondents are employed by applicantas petrol men (Grade 11) and stationed at various sections. The respondents raised a grievance of unfair grading in terms of the grievance handling procedure to the immediate supervisor.
The supervisor ruled in favour of the applicants. The respondents then took up the matter to the Public Safety Director who also found in favour of the applicant. The matter was then referred to the Employment Council for Harare Municipal Undertaking for conciliation. A certificate of no settlement was signed at conciliation. The applicant also ruled that respondents were... More
On 4th May 2010 this Court made a default order in favour of the Respondents. The order directed Applicant to reinstate Respondents or alternatively pay them damages in lieu of reinstatement. The order was made by reason of Applicant’s default.
On 18th March 2011 the Court granted Applicant leave to file a belated application for rescission of the earlier order. On 19th May 2011 Applicant filed the application for rescission. In matters of this nature an Applicant is required
to show good cause in order to obtain relief. The main pertinent factors are the explanation for the default and the... More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award which was made in favour of the Respondents in a matter where the Respondents, the then claimants alleged that they were performing duties above their grades and had not received payments for that or alternatively had not been promoted to the grades for which they performed the duties.
The background to the matter is that the Respondents who are in the Appellant’s employ in various capacities approached the Arbitrator on the basis that between 2000 and 2009 when the country faced an acute brain drain they were made to perform duties for... More
