This is an appeal against an award by a labour officer. Before the appeal could be heard two preliminary points were taken on behalf of the respondent. These are that: (i) the appellants have not complied with Rule 11A of the Rules of this Court; and (ii) the prayer is defective. More
On the 18 September 2023 this Court issued a judgement which dismissed applicant’s appeal against his dismissal from employment by respondent. A party wishing to appeal the judgement is guided by the Labour Court Rules 2017 whose Rule 43 provides that
“43(1) An application in terms of section 92F (2) of the Act seeking leave to appeal from any decision of the Court shall be made to the Judge of the Court who made the decision or in his or her absence, from any other Judge, within twenty-one days from the date of that decision.” More
This is an appeal against the decision of the Designated Agent who ruled that appellant’s backpay benefits were convertible to local currency at the rate of 1 to 1. The appellant filed the following grounds.
1) The Designated Agent erred in finding that the appellant’s backpay and benefits were convertible to local currency at the rate of 1 to 1 despite the fact that liability only came into existence after the effective date of SI 33/19
2) The Designated Agent erred in not finding that the respondent had made unlawful deductions from the appellant’s backpay and benefits and in not... More
The matter be and is hereby remitted for the court a quo to determine the following issues:
a) Whether damages should be awarded to the respondent for the period March 2009 to March 2019 payable at the rate of 1:1 between the US Dollar and the Zimbabwean dollar or at the prevailing inter-bank rate.
b) The damages and back-pay in lieu of reinstatement taking into account mitigatory factors, if any.
c) Whether the respondent should be paid back-pay for the period 11 October 2012 to 12 March 2018 during which he did not prosecute his appeal. More
Appellant appealed to this Court against his dismissal from employment by Respondent. The appeal was made in terms of Section 92D of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01. Respondent opposed the appeal. More
This is an application for review. The following are grounds for review.
‘1.The Disciplinary Authority lacks jurisdiction to preside over the matter since the applicable code of conduct sets up an appropriate disciplinary committee with jurisdiction and which is different from this disciplinary authority. More
This is an appeal against refusal of bail by a Magistrate sitting at Karoi Magistrates court on the basis that the appellants are likely to abscond. The appellants appeared before the Magistrate jointly charged with fraud in contravention of s136 of the Criminal Law [Codification and Reform] Act (Chapter 9:23). The 1st appellant is a farmer in Karoi and the 2nd appellant is employed by Agritex.
The background facts are that the 1st appellant misrepresented to the Agricultural and Rural Development Authority (ARDA) that he was capable to farm 20 hectares of sorghum on his farm and 60 hectares of... More
