NDEWERE E.F
The Applicant applied for Review of Honourable C. Kabasa’s award in the above case given on 4 May, 2011.
The grounds for review were that the award is defective in that:
a) “The “award”, does not give a meaningful factual narration and analysis as to what exactly were the issues before the Arbitrator.
b) On page 1 of the so called award there is no heading, “arbitral award” which is important and indicative that indeed it is an arbitral award.
c) There is no clear cut indication as to what was submitted by the parties to the Arbitrator... More
Respondents were employed by Appellant as builders on fixed term contracts from February 2008 until August, 2012. Respondents had several such contracts renewed at intervals. Respondents’ contracts of employment were terminated and the matter was brought before the National Employment Council for the Construction Industry for conciliation and subsequently to an Arbitrator. More
The following facts are common cause:
1.
Appellant worked for Respondent as a Property Manager.
2.
At the material times she was responsible for the Eastgate complex in Harare.
3.
The complex contained office space, a food court and retail business.
4.
Respondent leased space at the food court to a company called Opticare.
5.
Opticare then set up and ran a business called Captain’s Grill at the food court.
6.
Appellant’s husband Mr Allan Vutuzah, wasconnected to Opticare.
7.
The connexion led in due course to charges of misconduct being laid against Appellant by Respondent. More
The appeal was lodged against the determination by the Group Chief Executive Officer to dismiss the Appellant from employment following herconviction on a charge of violating category C (v) of the Zimbabwe Newspapers (1980)Limited Code of Conduct that is “insolence towards a subordinate, colleague, superior or clients by act, words or demeanor.” More
This is an application for condonation of late filing of an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against this Court’s judgment of the 6th May, 2011. More
This is an oral application made in chambers at the instance of the plaintiff on the date set down for a pre-trial conference. On 26 February 2013 the parties appeared before me duly represented by their respective legal practitioners of record for the purpose of holding a pre-trial conference. That pre-trial conference was postponed sine die on specific conditions which were explained to all present. In brief the parties were to convene their own conference with a view to settle the matter. If they failed then they would have to set out those matters which would have been agreed and... More
