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
The factual background to this matter is that the plaintiff and the defendant have been married for 26 years from 1993 to date. In 1993 they were married in a customary union which was succeeded by a civil marriage in 1998. The couple subsequently sired three children during the subsistence of their marriage. They formed 4 companies and built four homes during the marriage among other assets. In December 2019 the defendant left their matrimonial home abandoning the plaintiff and their three children. The plaintiff then launched divorce proceedings against the defendant seeking a decree of divorce and ancillary relief. 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 both conviction and sentence. The appeal follows the conviction of the appellant on three counts of theft of trust property as defined in s 113 (2) (d) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]. Pursuant to the conviction the appellant was sentenced to 7 years imprisonment of which 2 years imprisonment was suspended for a period of five years on the usual condition of good behaviour. The remaining 5 years imprisonment was suspended on condition of community service. 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
