This is an appeal against the decision of the Health Service Commission where it upheld the appellant employee’s guilty verdict and dismissal penalty meted out by the disciplinary authority. More
GOWORA JA:The parties herein are engaged in various wrangles in the Magistrates Court and the High Court. The wrangles have seen the parties file complaints of alleged criminal activities against each other. More
This is an appeal against an arbitration award. The terms of reference to the Arbitrator were whether:-
- the Appellant’s dismissal was unlawful
and
- the employer calculated the leave days wrongly
After considering Section 12 B(3)(b) of the Labour Act (CAP 28:01) and the parties contract of employment, the Arbitrator made the conclusion that Appellant’s claim was without merit. The findings were that:-
(i) the Appellant’s contract of employment clearly spelt out that at the end of the contract no expectation of re-engagement was to be made.
(ii) the Appellant did not state exactly who was engaged in his... More
The plaintiff issued summons against the defendant claiming damages in the sum of $900 679 549.87 arising from a horse riding accident on the 5th of November 2000.
The plaintiff sustained serious injuries of the head and torso. She is now confined to a wheel chair. More
This is an appeal against the decision of the Magistrates Court dated 3
October 2016. The appellant was charged with contravening section 3 (1) of the Gold Trade Act
[Chapter 21:03] for unlawful possession of 100.68 grams of gold valued at US $3 724.00
without a licence or permit. The appellant pleaded guilty and was subsequently convicted and
sentenced to 5 years imprisonment. The 100.68g of gold was forfeited to the State. More
This is an urgent chamber application. The applicant seeks a provisional order for a stay of the criminal trial against him in the magistrate’s court pending the determination of his application for review which is pending in this court. More
Initially applicant instituted these proceedings against two respondents namely CABS as first respondent and the Operations Manager CABS as second respondent. It then withdrew proceedings against second respondent and tendered wasted costs. This judgment therefore is in respect of the applicant and the respondent CABS. More
The 21 year old appellant appeared before a Magistrates’ Court, at Kwekwe on the 13th February 2017 facing two counts of assault and threats of violence in contravention of section 89 (1) and section 186 (1) of the Criminal Law Codification and Reform Act (Chapter 9:23), respectively. He was convicted and sentenced to 12 months imprisonment of which 2 months was suspended for 4 years on condition of future good conduct. Aggrieved by the sentence, the appellant has noted an appeal to this court. The state concedes that the sentence imposed against the appellant in the court a quo is... More
This judgment is to decide on a point in limine raised by the respondents in an appeal which was filed by the appellant against the respondent employees. The point in limine raised is that, the arbitral award granted in favour of the respondent employees is not suspended by the noting of the appeal which was done by the appellant. More
[1] The applicant stands barred in a matter wherein he seeks declaratory relief. The cause of his bar is failure to file heads of argument in terms of rule 42 (9) of the High Court Rules SI 202/20. The application is opposed by respondent who also raised in limine, the protest that applicant filed and withdrew a similar application. More
Sometime in 2015, the first respondent decided to outsource the management of some of its premium hotels and selected the appellant to manage its hotels. On or about 18 September 2015, the parties entered into a management agreement (“the agreement”) to regulate their business relationship in terms of which appellant was to render management services to the first respondent’s hotels. The agreement was amended and re-signed on 10 October 2015. Thereafter the agreed services were delivered by the appellant. More
This is an appeal against the decision of the arbitrator. The facts in this matter are largely common cause. Respondent was employed by the appellant as Principal of its school. Appellant proceeded to unilaterally reduce respondent’s salary by about 50%. Respondent took this matter up with appellant and stated in a letter addressed to appellant that if the matter was not amicably resolved as proposed in the letter she would proceed to resign from employment. The matter remained unresolved and respondent left appellant’s employment and took the matter up for conciliation. The matter was referred to arbitration and the arbitrator... More
Applicant employed Respondent at its Legacy International School as an Administrator. For reasons not disclosed to this Court, Respondent tendered her resignation on 1 February 2013. Respondent indicated in that letter that she would take her three (3) months’ leave during the resignation period. On 13 February 2013 Applicant and Respondent made an Agreement on the termination of Respondent’s services. More
The appeal was noted against an arbitral award handed down by the Honourable C. Mucheche dated 23rd November, 2009
The background factsto the matter are as follows;
The Respondent was employed by the Appellant as its Legal Publishing Unit Manager. On the 29th of October, 2008 he was suspended by Appellant on a variety of allegations. He appeared before a Disciplinary Committee on the 17th and 18th of that 2008 facing the following charges;
(i) Any act of conduct or omission inconsistent with the fulfillment of the express or implied conditions of his contract;
(ii) Willful disobedience to a lawful... More
This is an application by a designated agent, for the confirmation of his draft ruling. It is in terms of section 93 (5a)(a) and (b) of the Labour Act, Chapter 28:01 (the Act). The first respondent (the employer) raised two points in limine to the application. The first point is that the designated agent is not a labour officer and therefore may not apply for confirmation of his draft order in terms of section 93 of the Act. The second point is that the second respondent did not exhaust the local forum in terms of the workplace code of conduct. More
