Applicant applied for the review of disciplinary proceedings against him which were conducted by Respondent. Respondent opposed the application. During oral argument Applicant based his case on the improper composition of the disciplinary committee. Respondent conceded, and rightly so, that the committee was improperly constituted. Such a committee has no authority to conduct disciplinary proceedings, let alone to dismiss an employee. Authority for this proposition is found in the dicta of Sandura JA (as he then was) where he stated that an improperly constituted disciplinary committee “was a fatal irregularity which vitiated the proceedings.” More
Appellant worked for Respondent as a Meat Inspector based at Chivhu General Hospital. He was charged with misconduct (corruption and incompetence). A hearing was held which led to his conviction and dismissal from employment. Appellant appealed against his dismissal but Respondent dismissed the appeal. Appellant then appealed to this Court. More
The matter was placed before me as an appeal/cross-appeal against an arbitral award handed down by Honourable Mucheche on 28 October, 2010. For convenience the Appellant/Cross-Respondent shall be referred to as Appellant whereas the Respondent/Cross Appellant shall be referred as Respondent. More
The Appellant got engaged in the Respondent’s employ on 1 September 2012 after signing the offer letter on 16 July 2012. The letter specified that the Appellant was to begin work on 1 September 2012. The Appellant was given another contract to sign when he was already in employment. The Appellant refused to sign it and this began the legal tortuous route leading to his dismissal culminating in arbitration proceedings and finally to this Court. The Arbitrator ordered payment of damages in lieu of re-instatement. The Appellant is dissatisfied with the award and the Respondent is equally unhappy and has... More
Before the matter was finalized the appellant passed on.An application was made and granted to cite the parties as Estate Late Ishmael Chamisa being represented by the executrix Audrey Chamisa.
This matter comes as an appeal against respondent’s decision to dismiss the appellant. The background to this case is as follows. The appellant was employed by the respondent as a cash collections supervisor. The appellant’s duties included receiving authorised petty cash vouchers after checking them he would make payments. He was the custodian of the petty cash register and was the only person with access to the cash office. On... More
Appellant was employed as a teacher at Gwariwa Primary School. It is
alleged that she teamed up with her husband in committing acts of
insubordination towards the Headmaster of the school. The two would absent
themselves from work without authorisation. Appellant was subsequently
suspended from duty from 29 March 2011 to 29 June 2011. She thereafter
did not report for duty leading to her dismissal. She is displeased with the
dismissal and has appealed to this Court. More
