This is an appeal against the determination of the Respondent’s Appeals Authority which determination was handed down on the 19th of May 2023 and served on Appellant on the 23rd of May, 2023.
The material background facts to the matter are as follows. The Appellant was employed by the Respondent as a Loss Control Manager. On the 17th of April 2023 he was notified that, following a complaint by his immediate supervisor, the Respondent had reason to believe he had committed two acts of misconduct namely;
(i) Contravention of Section 4 (g) of Statutory Instrument 15 of 2006 i.e. habitual... More
Plaintiff caused the issuance of summons against the defendants wherein he claimed:
1. Payment of an amount of US$ 10 402.42 (ten thousand four hundred and two United States dollars and forty two cents) being the duty amount levied by ZIMRA on a vehicle sold to plaintiff by defendants.
2. Payment of car hire charges at the rate of RTGS 600 (six hundred RTGS dollars) per day from 18 December 2019 to the date of release of the vehicle from ZIMRA or to the date of full refund of the purchase price by defendants.
3. Alternatively, failing (1) above, the... More
Appellant appealed to this Court against her dismissal from employment by Respondent who opposed the appeal.
The grounds of appeal were three-fold as follows;
“1. The Respondent grossly erred and/or misdirected himself in his assessment of the evidence that was placed before the Disciplinary Committee. More
On 26 July 2024 under case number HCH 2530/24 (the main matter) this Court granted an order in favour of Korzim against the Minister, the Provincial Mining Director and Kingston. Having become aware of the existence of the order and that the ejectment was scheduled for 8 August 2024, Fourteen Karate, on 6 August 2024, instituted two Court proceedings. The first was a Court application for rescission of the order granted in the main matter on the basis that it was erroneously granted in the absence of Fourteen Karate, which claims that it is affected by that order. More
This is an appeal against the decision of the arbitrator who ruled that the respondent employees who had refused to sign new USD contracts had not repudiated their contracts and put themselves out of employment. The matter has a long and chequered history of being in the Labour Court and in the Supreme Court. The instant judgment is written out in fulfilment of a remittal order from the Supreme Court where after the Supreme Court concluded on the issue of citation it remitted the matter to this court so that the merits of the appeal could be entertained. More
The parties to this action are Fredson Mabhena as plaintiff. He is described as a male adult whose address is given as that of his legal practitioners. Such description of the plaintiff does not accord with r 13(a) of the High Court Rules which states inter alia that the declaration “…shall state truly and concisely –
(a) the name and description of the party suing and his or her place of residence or place of business.”
Subrule 1 (c) provides that the same declaration “… shall state truly and concisely –
(c) the name of the defendant and his or... More
This is an appeal against the decision of the respondent employer’s internal appeals committee which upheld the appellant employee’s guilty verdict and dismissal penalty following charges of conduct inconsistent with his employment. More
