This is an appeal against the decision of the appeals officer in a labour dispute pitting appellant employee and the respondent employer.
Facts of the matter are that the appellant who was in the respondent’s employ as a driver trainer was brought before a disciplinary committee to answer to charges of gross incompetency or inefficiency in the performance of his work. It was stated that the appellant had not been retested and that militated against him partaking duties that could require him to go to South Africa. Following the disciplinary hearing, he was dismissed from employment. He appealed internally without... More
The delay in the handing down of the judgment is sincerely regretted.
The above matters were placed before myself and other judges as individual appeals against decisions made by the Respondent’s Appeals Committee to dismiss the Appellants from employment following their convictions for acts of misconduct. The appeals are all premised on Section 92D of the Labour Act [Cap 28:01]. The matters were all set down for hearing before me during the Mutare Circuit Court on the dates as reflected above. Although submissions were received separately for each matter I have written this one consolidated judgment, in view of the... More
[1] This is a chamber application for the removal of a bar in terms of r 39 of the High Court Rules, 2021. The applicant seeks that the bar in HC 3614/23 (“the main matter”) be removed, and all the pleadings and documents filed after the automatic bar became operational be deemed to be properly before court, and that he be granted leave to file his replication and bundle of documents. More
The respondent is a company registered in terms of the laws of Zimbabwe. The appellant is a male adult who was formerly employed by the respondent as an international truck driver. On 3 August 2021, the appellant was arraigned before a Disciplinary Committee facing misconduct charges of gross negligence as defined in para 2.3.1 of the Employment Code of Conduct for the Transport Operating Industry (‘the Code ‘). The allegations were that between 3 May 2021 and 5 July 2021, while driving on duty, the appellant lost 528 litres of diesel due to gross negligent driving. The appellant failed to... More
This is an application for absolution from the instance made by the defendants at the close of the plaintiff’s case in terms of rule 56(6) of the High Court Rules, 2021. The plaintiff opposed the application More
The above notation on first and second applicant counsel`s appearance triggered an objection from Mr. Mpofu who appeared for the second respondent. The pithy of his protest being that by purporting to appoint separate counsel, first and second applicant effectively and improperly severed their case. I will return shortly to this point in greater detail.
[2] I would have disposed of this objection is summary fashion. However, the arguments subsequently raised necessitated an interpretation and issuance of guidance on, among other matters, the relationship between the rules of the General and Commercial Divisions of the High Court. More
