he appellant was employed by the respondent as a Finance Director in December 2007
as evidenced by his contract of employment filed of record. The applicant contends that he was
unlawfully dismissed from employment by the respondent after a disciplinary hearing effective
30 March 2020, as evidenced by the letter of dismissal filed of record. He contends that he
challenged the decision of the employer to dismiss him before this Court and in the Supreme
Court which ruled in his favour on the 7th of March 2023 and his dismissal was set aside. He
avers that it was ordered by... More
The appellant was employed by the respondent as a Finance Director in December 2007 as evidenced by his contract of employment filed of record. The applicant contends that he was unlawfully dismissed from employment by the respondent after a disciplinary hearing effective 30 March 2020, as evidenced by the letter of dismissal filed of record. He contends that he challenged the decision of the employer to dismiss him before this Court and in the Supreme Court which ruled in his favour on the 7th of March 2023 and his dismissal was set aside. He avers that it was ordered by... More
[1] This is appeal against the whole arbitral award of the Ministry of Public Service, Labour and Social Welfare, handed down by Arbitrator P. Kandengwa on 23 September 2024. More
Applicant applied for leave to appeal this Court’s judgment to the Supreme Court. The application was made in terms of Section 92F of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01, hereafter called the Act, as read with Rule 43 of the Labour Court Rules, 2017. Respondent opposed the application. At the onset of argument applicant made an oral application for condonation. The application was based on submissions by applicant’s attorney to the effect that; More
On 23 June 2025 this court handed down order LCH479/25 which read as follows:
“Appeal being merited it be and hereby succeeds.
Cross appeal being without merit be and is hereby set aside. The arbitral award is set aside in its entirety.
In the place of the arbitral award, parties may have a relook into the conduct which they classify as unfair dismissal together with the legitimate expectation issue as a single issue, taking into account the fact that, it is the employees’ view that they had a legitimate expectation of being re engaged by the employer which gave rise... More
Appellant was employed by the Respondent at its Mutawatawa District Hospital. Allegations of misconduct were levelled against him and he was brought before a Disciplinary Committee. He was found guilty on two charges and Not Guilty on the other two. One of the charges was withdrawn during the course of the hearing. Appellant is dissatisfied with this outcome and has approached this Court for relief. Appellant’s grounds of appeal . More
This is an appeal against the determination of the Designated Agent of the NEC for the Mining Industry, which determination is dated 30th of August, 2023. The appeal is opposed.
The material background facts to the matter are as follows. The 1st to 9th Respondents were all employed by the Appellant. They were engaged in various work underground and in other areas linked to production underground. They were engaged on the basis of monthly fixed term contracts. They had served for periods ranging for at least a year and above. They were terminated upon effluxion of time of their last... More
