Electronic Court judgements

Browse all Court Judgements

This is an appeal against an arbitral award in favour of the respondents. The respondents are former employees of the appellant. They were suspended with pay and benefits for thirty days pending disciplinary hearings. They were further suspended for another thirty days during which they were called for a hearing. The respondents walked out of the hearing after alleging that the matter had been referred to a designated agent in terms of S I 171 of 2010. The hearing proceeded in their absence and they were convicted and dismissed from employment. More

This is an appeal against an arbitral award issued by Honourable L M Gabilo on 23 April 2012. The award set aside the dismissal of the respondent by the appellant, and ordered his reinstatement. More

This is an application for condonation for late filing of an application for leave to appeal against the judgment of this court No. LC/H/146/20. The judgment was handed down on 3 July 2020. According to the applicant it received the judgement on 9 July 2020. The application for condonation was filed on 15 September 2020. More

This is an appeal against an arbitral award. The respondent, who was employed by the appellant, he was also an official of the workers committee. More

This is an application for stay of execution of an arbitral award pending the determination of an appeal before this court. The application is made in terms of section 92 E of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01]. In order to succeed in such an application the applicant has to show that it has a prima facie right to the relief, that the applicant would suffer irreparable harm if the relief is not granted and that the balance of convenience is in its favour. More

This is an appeal against an award made by an arbitrator sitting at Harare. The award was handed down on 27 January 2012. The appellant did not apply for the suspension of the operation of the award being appealed against pending the finalization of the appeal. The respondents have now raised a point in limine. Mr Mazhetese who appears on behalf of the respondents argued that the appellant has approached this Court with ‘dirty hands’. This is so Mr Mazhetese argued,because the Labour Act Chapter 28:01 (The Act) stipulates that an appeal against an award does not suspend the operation... More

An arbitration award made by the Honourable D.H. Muza is the subject of this appeal. The award ordered Appellant to reinstate Respondent’s employment or alternatively to pay him damages for loss of employment. Appellant appealed to this Court against the award. Respondent opposed the appeal. The crux of the appeal was that the award was grossly unreasonable and irrational. Excerpts of the award were quoted in support of this contention. More

The facts of the matter briefly outlined, are that the respondent was employed by the appellant as a messenger. It is alleged that on 15 May 2012 the respondent teamed up with his colleagues and visited some shops within the Harare Central Business District, where they demanded spot fines from shop owners. They did so after misrepresenting that they were licencing officials from the Council’s Licencing Inspectorate. This expedition led to the respondent’s arrest on criminal charges of impersonation of police. He was tried and acquitted of the criminal charges at the Harare Magistrates Court. More

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