This is an appeal against the decision of Respondent’s Disciplinary Committee, in terms of which Appellant was found guilty of misconduct and dismissed from employment. More
The Appellant was employed by the Respondent as the Chief Assayer. Part of his duties included keeping safe and secure samples received in the assay laboratory from various mines. It was also not in dispute that a spare key to the safe had been missing for in excess of seventeen years and had never been found. On the 10th of May, 2012 the Appellant in the company of two others, opened the safe and discovered that nine gold bullion samples were missing. The Appellant had been asked to release the gold bullion samples in question. The Appellant had no idea... More
This is an appeal against an award quantifying damages to be paid to respondent. Respondent was employed by the appellant and was dismissed. The arbitrator ruled that the dismissal was unlawful and he should be reinstated. Appellant did not reinstate respondent and did not appeal against the award. Respondent approached the arbitrator for quantification of damages. In calculating damages the arbitrator stated;
“In my own opinion the period within which the complainant can be reasonably expected to find alternative employment is 12 months considering the unemployment level in the country.” More
The appellant was dismissed from the respondent’s employ following disciplinary proceedings. His internal appeal failed. He was aggrieved and has therefore appealed that decision to this Court. More
The matter was set down for hearing on the 3rd of September, 2013. At the end of proceedings the parties were directed to file supplementary heads on an issue that had arisen in the course of proceedings. The parties having filed the supplementary heads of argument the file was referred back to me by the Registrar on the 1st September, 2014. The following is my judgement on the merits of appeal. More
This matter was set down as an application for the stay of attachment in execution of a default consent order which was granted by the Court in a matter where Applicant employer and Respondent employee were involved in a labour dispute where the Respondent had been dismissed from employment by the Applicant. More
In this application, the applicant seeks the following relief:-
1. A declaration that the refusal by the Magistrate to refer the issues raised by the applicant to the Supreme Court is wrong at law and consequently a breach of the applicant’s right to the protection of the law enshrined in section 18(1) of the former Constitution of Zimbabwe.
2. A declaration that the decision by the Attorney-General to proceed with the prosecution of the applicant more than five years after the alleged commission of the offence is a violation of the applicant’s right to the protection of the law under... More
