The appellant was employed by the respondent as a branch manager at its Mutare Branch. Through his recommendation an order was made and resulted in the respondent company losing money in excess of two hundred and twenty one thousand United States dollars.
The recommendation turned out to have emanated from a fraudulent deal. The appellant was unaware of the fraudulent nature of the transaction. He was thereafter charged with gross incompetence/inefficiency and was dismissed as a result. His internal appeal failed. More
This is an appeal against the decision of the National Employment Council for the Tobacco Industry Grievance and Disciplinary Committee (NEC GDC) to set aside the penalty of dismissal that had been meted on the respondent by the Works Council and substituting it with a Final Written Warning. More
This was an application for bail pending trial. The facts were poorly presented. Despite several sittings; despite several supplements to the bail statement and despite several supplements to the bail response, it remained unclear what exactly had transpired. Only after some blow by blow account in less formal proceedings in Chambers did I finally grasp what had transpired before and after the applicants’ arrest. More
The appellants are employed as drivers by the respondent. They had a dispute with the respondent over alleged non payment of overtime. The dispute was referred to an arbitrator who dismissed the claim by the appellants.
The appellants noted this appeal and the grounds of appeal are briefly that;
1. The arbitrator erred and misdirected herself at law as she applied terms and conditions that do not apply to the appellants. She used conditions that apply to Grades A, B, C, D & E but the appellants were in Grade F.
2. The arbitrator erred and misdirected herself at law... More
The Applicant submitted that he was employed by the Respondent as a supervisor and Imam of the Arcadian Islamic Society (Respondent) from the 1st of September 1989 up to the 28th of January 2015. This point was however disputed by the Respondent. It was Respondent’s counter submission that Appellant was not an employee instead he was only offering his services as per the Respondents religion and under the terms of the Koran. More
The record of this matter was placed before me for consideration in chambers. This is an appeal against the portion of the arbitral award that dismissed the Appellants’ claim for appointment to substantive post Grade 10. More
The parties appeared before me on 21 July 2016 and requested to compile the record and make supplementary submissions. The Court accordingly issued timelines within which the filing of documents was to be concluded. After both parties had filed the documents, they indicated that the Court could proceed to make a determination on the basis of the documents filed of record. The Court will thus proceed on that basis. More
