This is an application for condonation for late filing of a Notice of Response.
The Applicant was served with a Notice of Appeal on 21st May 2013. In the Notice of Appeal, the Respondent is challenging the decision of the Applicant company’s Appeals Officer, who confirmed Respondent’s dismissal from Applicant’s employment for misconduct. More
This is an application by the Applicant Company for interim relief in terms of Rule 34 of the Labour Court Rules. It is seeking the stay of the arbitral award which was made in favour of the Respondent employee and which it has now appealed against in the Labour Court. More
The brief background of this matter is that Respondent was employed by Appellant as a Kitchen Poter in October 2006. He rose through the ranks to become a Commis Cook at the time of his dismissal. In November 2008 the Respondent received a letter of suspension alleging that he had breached;
“Theft- Gross
Unlawful and intentionally appropriating property belonging to the company or in possession of the employer, other employee’s or guests with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.” More
On the 31st May, 2013 this court issued a judgment whose order gave rise to this application for quantification of damages.
The order reads:-
“In the result, the appeal must succeed.
The Appellant is to be reinstated into his former position.
If reinstatement is no longer tenable the Appellant is to be paid damages for premature loss of his job.”
It is clear from this order that retrospectivity was not intended. More
The matter was placed before me as an application for an order in terms of Section 93 (7) of the Labour Act [Cap 28:01]. Whereas initially the Applicants were three one of the Applicants withdrew his matter. The two Applicants before the court were Ranganayi Simon and Cosmas Bhasera.
In his founding affidavit the 1st Applicant, Ranganayi Simon averred on oath that; he was a former employee of the 1st Respondent. The 2nd Respondent is a Designated Agent for National Employment Council for the Food Industry. He was the conciliator in the two disputes that have given birth to the... More
Respondent who had been employed by Appellant was dismissed from employment and successfully challenged his dismissal before an arbitrator. The arbitrator ordered his reinstatement without loss of salary and benefits with effect from the date of dismissal. Respondent alleges that he reported for duty but was denied entrance into Appellant’s premises and was told not to report for duty. He then approached the arbitrator for quantification of damages. More
