Court Judgements
Labour Court Judgements
Applicant applied to this Court for condonation of a late appeal in terms of Rule 22 of the Labour Court Rules S.I. 150/17. Respondent opposed the application. The decision sought to be appealed was made by the Appeals Officer on the 14th September 2020. In terms of Rule 19 applicant ought to have appealed to this Court within 21 (twenty-one) days of that decision. He did not do so. He filed an application for condonation in March 2022 under reference LC/H/235/22. Same was struck off the roll on 5th August 2022. He filed another application for condonation on 22nd September... More
On 23rd February, 2011 the Honourable L. Maburutse made an arbitration award. In terms thereof, he dismissed Appellants’ claim of unlawful termination of their employment by Respondent. Appellants then appealed to this Court against the award. More
This is an appeal against the determination of the National Employment Council”(Banking Undertaking)’s Appeals Board (NEC Appeals Board) handed down on 29 April 2011. The determination ordered the reinstatement of the respondent without loss of salary or benefits, reversing the appellant’s Disciplinary Committee’s penalty of dismissal. More
The three respondents were employed by the appellant in different capacities.
During the course of their employment, the respondents committed certain acts of misconduct whose details are irrelevant in the resolution of this case.
All the respondents were charged albeit separately and were found liable.
The penalty given for each of them was a demotion and a final written warning. Each of them appealed to the National Employment Council Appeals board.
For the first respondent the appeals board confirmed the verdict but altered the penalty. The appellant had demoted the first respondent from Grade C5 to B4. The appeals board... More
AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT - APPELLANT BANK OF ZIMBABWE AND JENNIPHER ZUWENI - RESPONDENT (2012-10-19)
This is an appeal by the Respondent bank against the decision of the N.E.C for the Banking Industry and Undertaking’s decision to reinstate the appellant to her original position with the bank. Appellant had been dismissed by the respondent on allegations of having contravened category D section 11 (1) of the Respondent’s code of conduct which read “any serious act, conduct or omission inconsistent with the fulfillment of the express or implied conditions of contract”. More
