This is an appeal against an arbitral award wherein the Learned Arbitrator ordered the appellant to reinstate the respondent with no loss of salary with an alternative order for damages should reinstatementbe no longer possible.
The facts of this matter are as follows:
The appellant company’s managerial employees formed a union called the Managerial Credit Union (MCU). The respondent was chairman of that union. It had its own constitution which governed its operations. The appellant was MCU’s guarantor with their bankers, CBZ Bank. Its (the appellant’s) Chief Executive Officer (CEO) was the patron of MCU. The respondent abused the union’s... More
This is an application for ‘an order’. The draft is couched as follows:
“(1) The application for quantification in United States Dollars be and is hereby granted.
(2) The Respondent is hereby ordered to pay the Retrenchees as follows:
(a) Innocencia C. Chitauro US$10 663-38
(b) Cosmas Chitauro US$2 793-36
(c) Respondent to pay costs of suit.”
The application is opposed.
In 2005 the present respondent filed an appeal with this court. The appeal was dismissed in judgment LC/H/70/2005.
At the time that the judgment was granted the respondent was trying to resile from an agreement it had entered with... More
This is a chamber application for a prohibitory interdict brought on a certificate of urgency. The applicant is a duly constituted Association whose existence and governance is in terms of its constitution. It is a voluntary association of some players in the sugar industry. More
: This is an application for rescission of a default judgment issued against the applicant under HC 1648/21. The application was made in terms of r 63 of the old High Court Rules 1971 on the basis that there is good and sufficient cause to do so. More
MUREMBA J: The applicant is Zimbabwe Chemicals, Plastiscs and Allied Workers Union (ZCPAWU), a trade union registered in terms of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01]. In terms of s 3 of its Constitution it is an independent body capable of suing and being sued on its own. It has the capacity to sue on behalf of its members. Members of the applicant are employees of the respondents. The first respondent is Chemplex Corporation Limited and it is the holding company of G & W Industrial Minerals (PVT) LTD; Dorowa Minerals Limited; Zimbabwe Phosphate Industries Limited; and Chemplex Animal & Public... More
The Respondent was, until his resignation on 29 February 2012, employed by the Applicant as its Acting Director. As an employee of the Applicant he was entitled to use of the employer’s vehicle, an Isuzu Extended Cab Registration number ABK 7760. More
The applicant seeks an order for stay of execution of the arbitral award of Honourable Dzviti issued on 17 December 2015. This is in terms of section 92 E (3) of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01]. The application has been made pending the determination of the appeal filed with this Court under Case No. LC/H/15/2016. More
The applicant is the registered conglomeration of trade unions and is engaged in the furtherance of its members’ interests. The first respondent is the regulating authority for Harare Central in terms of the Public Order and Security Act [Cap 11:17] (the Act) while the second and third respondents are the Commissioner General of Police and the Co-ministers of Home Affairs under whose authority the first respondent falls. More
“1.That it be hereby declared that the sudden conduct and/or practice by employers in Zimbabwe (with the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th respondents as examples), purportedly as a response to the Covid-19 pandemic, whereby they prohibit unvaccinated employees from reporting for work and from continuing to perform their obligations under subsisting contracts of employment is/are an infringement of the fundamental right to human dignity of the affected employees protected by section 51 of the Constitution of Zimbabwe, 2013.
2. That it be hereby declared that the sudden conduct and/or practice by employers in Zimbabwe (with the 3rd, 4th,... More
Despite the bulky paper work involved in this case coupled with the detailedand well thought submissions made by the two counsels I prefer to follow a simplified version of this case and put it in the following terms:
Following a series of meetings which were chaired by the first respondent as president of ZCTU and which commenced in 2010 and which meetings included basically all the parties now soaked in this litigation the parties unanimously agreed that the organization would hold its General Conference between 19 and 20 August 2011. More
This is an appeal against the decision of a Disciplinary Authority set up by the appellant.
The respondent was employed by the appellant in a senior position of Mine Manager. Allegations of misconduct were levelled against him. Disciplinary proceedings in terms of the Labour (National Employment Code of Conduct) Regulations, 2006 Statutory Instrument 15 of 2006 (National Employment Code of Conduct/Model Code) (S.I. 15/06) were conducted against the respondent. At the conclusion of the hearing the Disciplinary Authority exonerated the respondent from any wrong doing. That decision aggrieved the appellant, hence this appeal. More
The dispute between the parties is a simple debt for the payment of money, but is complicated by the involvement of diamonds to part settle the amount due. Before delving into the factual matrix of the case, I wish to start by housekeeping issues. On 17 January 2020, the applicant herein filed a court application under HC 403/20 seeking a declaratory relief that applicant fully paid, extinguished, amortized and discharged the first respondent’s judgment debt, execution costs and legal costs secured under a writ of execution dated 4 October 2017. More
This is an application for leave to appeal a judgment of this court to the Supreme Court. After assessing addresses from both parties, the applicant has raised an arguable issue. Further the question of sufficiencyof evidence especially in a situation like the present one would, in my view require that the Supreme Court considers the appeal. More
This is an application for an order for direct access to the Constitutional Court in terms of s 167 (5) (a) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe as read with r 21(2) of the Constitutional Court Rules, 2016. In the event that direct access is granted, the applicant intends to file a substantive court application under s 85 (1)(a) of the Constitution to set aside the judgment of the Supreme Court in Case No. SC 201/23, on the basis that the court, in dealing with a non-constitutional matter, violated the right of the applicant to equal protection and benefit of the... More
The applicant in three separate applications petitioned this court for an order against the respondents in the following terms.
WHEREUPON, after reading the documents filed of record More
