This is an application for stay of execution of an arbitral award pending the determination of an appeal before this court.
The application is made in terms of section 92 E of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01].
In order to succeed in such an application the applicant has to show that it has a prima facie right to the relief, that the applicant would suffer irreparable harm if the relief is not granted and that the balance of convenience is in its favour. More
The facts of the matter briefly outlined, are that the respondent was employed by the appellant as a messenger. It is alleged that on 15 May 2012 the respondent teamed up with his colleagues and visited some shops within the Harare Central Business District, where they demanded spot fines from shop owners. They did so after misrepresenting that they were licencing officials from the Council’s Licencing Inspectorate. This expedition led to the respondent’s arrest on criminal charges of impersonation of police. He was tried and acquitted of the criminal charges at the Harare Magistrates Court. More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award wherein the Arbitrator set aside the employer’s dismissal of the respondents for willful disobedience to a lawful order and ordered their reinstatement with no loss of salary or benefits from date of dismissal or alternatively award them the appropriate damages. More
This is an appeal against an appeal against the arbitral award by Hon Arbitrator Mudzimure that was handed down on 5 May 2015. The arbitrator had ordered the Appellant to reinstate the Respondent without loss of benefits and salary. More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award.
The respondent raised a grievance against the appellant, their employer. They argued that they had been wrongly placed in grade 11 instead of in grade 10.
The issue was referred for arbitration and the arbitrator captures the terms of reference as
“To determine whether or not the complainants were wrongly (graded) placed in grade 11 instead of grade 10 upon their deployment to driving duties.”
The arbitrator found that the respondents had been placed in a wrong grade and each of the respondents was to be placed in the right grade i.e.... More
This is an application for condonation of late application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court combined with an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court.
On 25 October 2013 this Court granted an application for the granting of the appeal in terms of Rule 19 (3) (a) of S.I. 59/06 as respondent in that matter (now applicant) had not filed heads of argument as required by the same rules. In terms of Rule 36 of S.I. 59/06, a party desiring to seek leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against any decision of this court must... More
