Firstthe plaintiffobtained an order for the joinderto his suit ofthe second plaintiff and third defendant before my brother Judge Mawadze on 28 September 2015. The order requiredthe third defendant (Wintertons Legal Practitioners), to file its plea within 10 days.
Without giving notice of intention to amend, the plaintiffs filed two “amended declarations” on 8 October 2015. On the same day plaintiffs proceeded to “serve” the amended declarations and order of joinder. They filed the affidavit of service of the first plaintiff as “proof of service” on 4 November 2015. More
This is an appeal against an award by an arbitrator. After hearing the matter the Learned Arbitrator confirmed the appellant’s dismissal from the respondent’s employ. Aggrieved by that award the appellant appeals to this court on the following grounds:
“1. The arbitrator grossly misdirected himself by concluding that it is legally correct for the respondent to selectively charge an individual for alleged misconduct arising from a collective decision of a board formed in terms of statute. In this case out of six members of the Procurement Committee only three members were charged and others were not, without any reason being... More
This is appeal against an arbitral award in which the arbitral award in which the arbitrator had to determine who the correct respondent was between the cited respondent and a sister company called K M Agribusiness, also known as Caprisun Agricultural Sales (Pvt) Ltd (hereinafter referred to as Caprisun).
The arbitrator found that the appellant had wrongly sued the respondent as his former employer yet his correct former employer was Caprisun and dismissed the claim. More
This is an application for condonation of late filing of a notice of response by the Applicants to an appeal filed by the Respondent.
Respondent filed an appeal on the 11th February, 2015 against an arbitral award pitting itself and the Applicants. The appeal was served on the Applicants on the 5th March, 2015. In terms of Rule 15 sub-rule (2) of this Court’s Rules Statutory Instrument 59 of 2006 Applicants were obliged to file their response within 14 days of date of service. More
This matter was referred to me for determination on the record in terms of Section 89 (2) (a) (i) of the Labour Act [Cap 28 : 01]. It is one of the matters that have otherwise been lying idle due to failure on the part of the Appellant to pay sheriff’s costs for services of Notice of Set-Down. More
The respondent was employed by the appellant as a Plant Manager in Mozambique. He was dismissed from employment following disciplinary proceedings for absenteeism from work. The matter was referred to an Arbitrator who ordered that the respondent be reinstated or payment of damages in lieu of reinstatement. More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award.
The respondent was employed by the appellant as a till operator from 20 August 2010 to 30 June 2013. He claimed he was unfairly dismissed when he was put on leave without pay and returned to find that the respondent had closed the place of business he was operating from. More
