This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the Labour Court (“the court a quo”), dated 10 June 2022. The judgment was passed in respect of two consolidated appeals that were filed before it. In that judgment the court a quo upheld the respondent’s appeal against dismissal from employment and ordered his reinstatement or alternatively, the payment of damages in the event that reinstatement was no longer possible. More
In September, 2016 the applicant purchased the mining business from Old Nic Mine. It undertook to employ the mine’s former workers. Its undertaking was premised on the condition that the workers would not claim from it any money which was due to them from Old Nic Mine for the period that they were on unpaid leave. A majority of the mine’s former workers agreed to the condition. They were therefore re-engaged and their contracts of employment taken over and carried forward by the applicant. The respondents did not agree to the condition which the applicant proposed to others and them.... More
This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the Magistrate’s Court in which the court a quo granted an application in favour of the 1st respondent (Mavetera) for the rectification of the register in terms of section 162 of the Companies and Other Business Entities Act (the Act) [Chapter 24:31]. More
The respondent in this matter raised preliminary points which were partly successful. It sought to appeal to the Supreme Court but that Court declined jurisdiction at that stage preferring to have the matter referred back to this Court. More
The matter was placed before me as an application for condonation for late filing of an appeal against the determination of the Designated Agent of the National Employment Council for the Mining Industry which determination was handed down on the 18th of May 2023. The application is filed in terms of Rule 22(1) of the Labour Court Rules, 2017. It is opposed. More
The determination of urgency in this matter depends on the efficacy of applicable domestic remedies. Are the remedies concerned “effective, available and adequate” ? The remedies under examination are reposed in the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act [ Chapter 22:23] (“the Act”). More
This application is brought in terms of Rule 39 (4) (a) of the High Court Rules, 2021, and seeks the lifting of bar operating against it. The salient facts are that, on 3 October 1996, the applicant and the 2nd respondent entered into a notarial and prospecting contract and option agreement. In terms of the agreement, the applicant transferred its mining claims to the 2nd respondent. More
