On the 8th January, 2014 Applicant filed an application for condonation of late noting of an appeal against an arbitral award. The award to be appealed against was issued on the 19th October, 2012. More
This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against a decision of this court dismissing the appeal by the applicant. The application is made in terms of section 92 F (2) of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01] (the Act) as read with Rule 36 of the Labour Court Rules (the rules) Statutory Instrument 59/2006. More
The brief factual background is that the applicant was employed by the respondent as Financial Accountant. He was dismissed for misconduct after disciplinary proceedings held in terms of the Labour (National Employment Code of Conduct) Regulations Statutory Instrument 15 of 2006. (National Code).
The matter went for arbitration, following procedures provided for in the National Code. The arbitrator, in his award dated 10 December 2013, upheld the verdict of guilty, but set aside the penalty of dismissal. The arbitrator ordered the reinstatement of the applicant, without pay and benefits for the period he was on suspension. It appears the penalty... More
This is an application for condonation of late noting of an appeal. The reasons proffered for approaching the court later than is set out in the Rules is that the respondent did not furnish timeously the applicant with the record of proceedings. It was submitted on behalf of the applicant thatonce the respondent availed the said record, the applicant commenced to note an appeal with this Court. By then he was already out of time, hence this application. More
The applicant has approached this Court for interim relief in terms of section 92 E (3) of the Labour Act [Cap 28:01].
The applicant employed the respondents in various capacities. It is alleged that the applicant was underpaying the respondents which resulted in the matter being referred to a labour officer for conciliation and finally to an arbitrator. The arbitrator found in favour of the respondents and the applicant has appealed against that decision. Pending the determination of the appeal the applicant has applied for a stay of the execution of the arbitrator’s award. More
The facts of this case are largely undisputed. Following suspicion that respondent had committed acts of misconduct, he was suspended without pay and benefits on 12 October 2009. The letter of suspension also invited respondent to attend a disciplinary hearing on 30 October 2009. Two charges were preferred against the respondent it being theft or fraud and failure to deposit subscriptions he received within the stipulated seven days. He was found liable and dismissed. Respondent referred the matter to the Ministry of Labour for conciliation. Conciliation failed and the parties subsequently More
This matter came before me as an application for stay of execution. The record reflects the applicant as Samson Makonde. By consent it was agreed to amend this erroneous citation on the record and court roll so that the applicant is correctly cited as COMTY ELECTRONICS RIBBON WORLD (PVT) LTD. Samson Makondeis only the manager representing applicant. More
