This is an appeal against an arbitral award dated the 30th of April 2013, which ordered Applicant to pay the Respondent an amount of $1200.00 to cover underpayment of incentives. More
This is an application for a review of disciplinary proceedings held by the respondent’s Disciplinary Authority. The Disciplinary Authority sat to inquire into misconduct allegations levelled against the applicant. The disciplinary hearing did not go into the merits of the matter. The applicant raised preliminary issues relating to the procedural fairness of the disciplinary proceedings, such as the composition of the disciplinary panel. More
With due respect the grounds given were rather terse. At best they are ambiguous. They do not specify which points the appeal raises or the exact findings which are impugned. I consider the grounds as void because they do not raise points of law. In terms of section 98 (10) of the Labour Act Chapter 48:10 (hereafter called the Act) an appeal against an arbitration award must raise points of law and not fact. More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award which upheld the dismissal of the appellant from the respondent’s employ. The arbitrator proceeded on the basis of written submissions as agreed to by the parties. More
This Urgent Chamber Application was placed before me because the Chief Justice was not available to hear it. The application raised two questions for determination. The first question is whether an interim order suspending the operation of legislation compelling payment by a taxpayer of the amount of tax liable to be paid notwithstanding an appeal to the Fiscal Appeal Court or pending a decision of a court should be granted pending the hearing and determination of the main application challenging the constitutional validity of the legislation by the full bench of the Constitutional Court. The second question is whether an... More
On 9 May 2014 this Court, dismissed Applicant’s application for rescission of the judgment of MUZOFA J which had been handed down on 30 January 2014. Applicant is dissatisfied with that decision and seeks to approach the Supreme Court. This is an application in terms of section 92F of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01]. The basis of the appeal is that the Court did not give due weight to Applicant’s written submissions in considering the prospects of success. Further, it was averred that the Supreme Court should be requested to correctly state the interpretation and applicability of Rules 19 and... More
This is an application for rescission of judgment granted by MUZOFA J. on 30th January 2014.
The brief background of this matter are that Applicant and Respondents appeared before PRESIDENT NDEWERE (as she then was) on 20th June 2013 where Applicant applied for time to file Heads of Argument. This application was granted. Applicant did not file Heads of Argument until 4th October 2013. Meanwhile the Respondents had made an application in terms of Rule 19 on 5th September 2013 and on 29th November 2013 the Registrar wrote to Respondents to address certain issues in that application. The application by... More
