The judgment in this matter was meant to have been handed down latest by the first term of 2013. However when the court sat down to consider the papers filed of record and the oral submissions by the parties on 29 November 2012 it became apparent that there was need to recall the lawyers representing both parties to shed light on the issues which exercised the mind of the court when it was preparing for the judgment. Consequently the court invited the said lawyers on the 21 March 2013. More
This is an appeal against an Arbitral Award wherein it was ordered that Respondent be reinstated to his original position as the decision to dismiss him was null and void as it was made outside the prescribed time frames. More
The facts of this matter are largely undisputed. They are that the respondent was employed by the appellant on 17 January 1995 as an Administrative Officer (training). More
The Appellant was the Respondent’s employer. On 5 April, 2006, the Appellant dismissed the Respondent from employment following a disciplinary hearing for absence from duty without reasonable cause. The Appellant says the Respondent did not appeal against the decision; he left employment as a result of the dismissal and resurfaced in February, 2011 when he referred his case to the designated agent for the Employment Council for the Harare Municipal undertaking on 4 February, 2011, alleging unfair labour practice. More
This is an application in terms of Section 92 E (3) of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01] for stay of execution of an arbitral award in favour of the Respondent More
This is an application for rescission of judgment handed down by this court on 8th July 2011. For such an application to succeed Applicant must;
1) give reasonable explanation for failing to attend court at the appointed time; and
2) show that it has good prospects of success on appeal.
Applicant was served to attend court through a telefax mode. Applicant denies having received the said fax message. In other words Applicant submits that he was never served with a notice to appear in court on 8 July 2011. For default judgment to be competently granted, Applicant should have been... More
This is an appeal against the decision of the Works Council of the Respondent. The Respondent dismissed the appellant following disciplinary proceedings for “Proven cases of theft” in violation of provisions of the respondent’s code of conduct.
The facts of this matter appear to be largely common cause. They are as follows:
The appellant who was employed by the respondent as a driver was sent to collect “empties”. After travelling for a distance of 26 kilometres there was a decline of fuel in the truck he used in the volume of between 95 and 120 litres (diesel). Further the respondent... More
