George Makings
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
INDEX of DECIDED LABOUR CASES shown alphabetically BY SUBJECT 1987-2016 Employers entering into disputes with employees will always find it useful to arm themselves with a working knowledge of labour law – as well as key ‘decided cases’ where the Courts have interpreted the law in specific circumstances. Fortune favours the prepared, in seeking to conclude labour disputes _________________________________________________________________ The periodical Labour Relations Information Service explains labour laws and summarises court judgments in layman’s terms, for subscribers’ guidance. This INDEX lists judgments summarised in 29 volumes of LRIS from inception in 1987 to 2016 Cases are indexed alphabetically by subject – e.g. Expectation (doctrine of legitimate expectation), Company vehicle, Damages etc. Please note that a Court case may be identified by a number of different key words – e.g. ‘Notice’ as well as ‘Dismissal during probation’. For subscribers’ ease of reference, such cases are listed in this Index under each of the different topics, or are cross-referenced. In this INDEX – SC refers to Supreme Court for example, SC 32/95 refers to Supreme Court Judgment No. 32 in 1995 HC to High Court (where the venue is not known) HH to High Court Harare, and HB to High Court Bulawayo LC/H to Labour Court Harare ZLR refers to the twice-yearly Zimbabwe Law Reports published by the Legal Resources Foundation 1989(1) ZLR 293 (S) means Volume 1 of 1989, page 293, Supreme Court The numbers on the right side of each page below (e.g. 9.1.14) refer to the Volume, Issue and Page where the case report appears - for example, in regard to the first case, below, City of Harare versus Zimucha, 9.1.14 means Volume 9, Issue Number 1, Page 14 of the Labour Relations Information Service journal. Where subsequent amendments to the Labour Act impinge on decided cases, details of the new section are given briefly in the Index – inset, in italics, underlined Topic - sub-heading Parties in dispute Court/case number/year LRIS reference Absence from work - because of sickness - payment of wages & allowances City of Harare v Zimucha SC 32/1995 9.1.14 - induced by employer – dismissal is not warranted Shepherd Makovere v Zvimba RDC LC/H/330/2003 18.1.1 - ‘reasonable excuse’ for absence - - where no ref. in Code to ‘reasonable excuse’ for absence Cottco v Muchirahondo SC 94/2002 17.7.10 - with reasonable excuse Business Equipment Corp v Mtetwa SC 68/2007 22.2.3 - without reasonable excuse TM Supermarkets v Muburiri SC 55/2000 14.2.14 Mwanyisa v Minister of Finance & Others HH 65/2001 14.10.4 PTC v Nembaware Labour Relations Tribunal September 1992 7.1.5 Chikuya v Dairibord HH 124/2001 15.1.7 - repudiates contract of employment Circle Cement v Nyawasha SC60/2003 20.4.3 - without leave – when dismissal is warranted Zisco v Keche SC 34/1998 11.9.6 Girjac Services v Mudzingwa SC 41/999 12.10.3 - also see ‘Failure to return to work’ Abusive language - ‘warrants instant dismissal, generally speaking’ Medical Investments t/a Avenues Clinic v Phiri SC 266/96 11.8.8 - where there are no aggravating features 1 OK Bazaars v Gwashu SC 96/2000 14.2.9 Accidents – termination as result – see ‘Sick leave exceeded’ Acknowledging receipt – see ‘Illiteracy’ Acknowledgement of debt - even involving ‘non-payment of remuneration’ does not constitute a labour dispute (i.t.o. Labour Act) Ndlovu v Highlanders Football Club HB 95/2011 24.4.2 Admission - of fact/mistake may not prove commission of offence Magejo v PTC SC 156/96 10.6.1 Makuwaza v NRZ SC 186/97 11.5.14 - not responding to misconduct charges amounts to admission of guilt Takawira v Ministry of Finance SC 67/2001 15.3.10 ‘Advancing social justice in the workplace’ Simbi Steelmakers v Shamu SC 71/2015 29.2.3 Advising employees on personal family matters (1) Ralph v van Vuuren HH 5/2009 (2) Berens v Berens HH 28/2009 22.3.14 Agreement - to award shares - a vague promise is not a binding contract Nestoros v Innscor HH73/2007 21.3.9 - to purchase company vehicle – ‘get it in writing’ (see ‘Anton Piller order’) - to resign – need not be in writing Murire v NSSA SC 75/98 11.10.6 Alternative employment - repudiating contract by taking up alternative employment Lawn v Zimbabwe Sun Hotels HH 72/1987 1.2.2 Zimsun v Lawn 1988(1) ZLR 143 (S) 5.1.16 & 15.5.10 Maguchu v Lever Brothers SC 78/2000 14.1.2 - back-pay up till time of taking up alternative employment – see ‘Reinstatement’ Anton Piller order (application for attachment of documents/evidence without notice) Cooper v Leslie & Others 2000(1) ZLR 14 (H) 14.12.8 Appeals - against compulsory arbitration automatically suspends award Dhlodhlo v Deputy Sheriff & Watershed College HH 76/2011 25.2.3 - against dismissal for strike action Tsodzo & 87 Others v Saybrook (1978) & Anor HH 148/98 12.1.7 - against retrenchment – see ‘Retrenchment – appeals - suspension’ - cross-appeal Maguchu v Lever Brothers SC 78/2000 14.1.2 Chodokufa v NEC Catering HH 67/2002 15.11.12 - late appeals Matoi v Zisco HH 274/1990 5.3.14 Kodzwa v Secretary for Health & PSC SC 50/99 12.10.7 Chubb Union v Chubb Union Workers Committee SC1/2001 14.6.9 Mwanyisa v Minister of Finance & Others HH 65/2001 14.10.4 Mukwinya v Clan Transport SC 47/2001 14.10.12 Toolmaking & Engineering v Chimombe SC 12/2001 14.10.15 Barclays Bank v Fortune Ncube SC 26/2009 23.1.7 - must follow procedures in Code of Conduct Zimunya v Forestry Commission HH 221/1999 13.4.1 Muroyiwa v OK Bazaars SC 83/2000 14.2.4 OK Bazaars v Soko SC 108/2000 14.3.10 Barclays Bank v Fortune Ncube SC 26/2009 23.1.7 - must follow procedures in Code of Conduct – see Grievances - NEC Appeals Committee wrongly constituted J I T Industries v Sibanda SC 101/2000 14.3.5 - on the basis of the written record : significance of the record The State v Mazangwa HH 370/2012 26:3:6 The State v Mazambani HH 449/2012 - successful appeal in terms of Code precludes re-investigation Forestry Commission v Zimunya SC 48/2001 14.12.1 - suspension of determination pending appeal - rights accrued before 7-3-03 not affected by amendments 2 Barclays Bank v Nyahuma SC 86/2004 18.9.4 - suspension of determination - not automatic – must seek suspension Chauruka v Associated Textiles HH 1990 5.1.18 - on appeal against labour officer, determination automatically suspended UTC (Zimbabwe) v Chigwedere SC 21/2001 14.9.12 - on appeal in terms of Code of Conduct, determination not suspended Founders Building Society v Mazuka HH 85/2000 13.10.5 Cotton Company v Mamombe HH 138/2000 14.2.4 UTC (Zimbabwe) v Chigwedere SC 21/2001 14.9.12 Circle Cement v Mugore & Chinymutangira HH 174/2001 15.3.8 - suspension of retrenchment pending – see ‘Retrenchment – Appeals’ - to the High Court - to compel Labour Relations Tribunal to set date to hear appeal Caltex Oil v LR Tribunal & Others HH c.1991 5.2.15 - also see ‘Review by Court – Rules for review’ An Appeal takes place when a party is satisfied with the proceedings but not the conclusion – compare ‘Review’ - to the Labour Court - against compulsory arbitration Samudzimu v Dairibord HH 204/2010 24.4.7 - against excessive wage increases awarded by arbitrator Chamber of Mines v Associated Mineworkers Union LC/H/250/2012 25.3.2 - court looks at evidence placed before it Zimasco v Chizema SC 68/2007 22.1.4 - grounds of appeal against arbitral award wider than for High Court Mbisva v Rainbow Tourism Group SC 32/2009 22.4.6 - limits on powers to alter penalty Mashonaland Turf Club v Mutangadura SC 5/2012 26.1.2 - must first exhaust domestic remedies - cannot apply direct Murowa Diamonds v Makuumbe SC 16/2009 25.2.5 - must reconsider its default judgments Redstar Wholesalers v Mutomba SC 142/2004 20.1.6 - standard of proof required at Labour Court - See Proof - to the Labour Relations Tribunal – see ‘Labour Relations Tribunal’ - to the Supreme Court - condones use of wrong Court Rule Zimnat Life v Dikunye SC 21/2008 22.1.12 - don’t waste court’s time by falsely claiming ‘question of law’ Sable Chemicals v Easterbrook SC 18/2010 24.2.4 - no question of law can arise in an order given by consent Chawatama v UTC SC 99/2004 October 2007(2) Bulletin - not declaring conflict of interest constitutes a question of law Export Leaf Tobacco v Gwavava SC45/2006 20.6.10 - on a question of law (or where there has been serious misdirection on the facts) Muzuva v United Bottlers SC 25/1994 7.4.5 National Foods v Magadza SC 105/1995 9.9.1 Gauntlet Security v Mbijana SC 82/1999 12.12.8 Zhomwe v BHP Minerals SC 3/2001 16.2.1 Reserve Bank v Granger & Mataruka SC 34/2001 14.9.13 Mutsuta v Cagar P/L SC 47/2009 23.1.4 - on a question of law - whether Retrenchment Committee followed procedures is a question of law UZ v Mandeya & Matamba SC 39/2009 25.2.4 - see also ‘Retrenchment – appeals against’ - loss claimed must be proved Heywood Investments v Zakeyo SC 32/2013 26:4:2 - waiving rights (and accepting settlement) means cannot then appeal against dismissal Halwick Investments v Nyamwanza SC 48/2009 24.1.2 - why you must first get permission to appeal to the Supreme Court - procedure to follow if permission is delayed Ngazimbi v Murowa Diamonds SC 27/2013 27.1.3 Apprentices – Discipline for apprentices is the same as for other employees Bingara v NRZ & Others HB 175/94 9.2.1 Arbitration - appeals to Labour Court - grounds of appeal wider than for High Court Mbisva v Rainbow Tourism Group SC 32/2009 22.4.6 - see also ‘High Court’ - arbitral decision set aside by Supreme Court Zesa v Maposa SC 114/1999 13.6.1 - challenge to impartiality must be responded to 3 Trust Corporation v Gabilo HH 59/2009 23.4.9 - compulsory Old Mutual v Old Mutual Workers Committee SC 257/1996 10.8.4 Catering Employers Assn v Union & LR Tribunal SC 112/2001 15.8.1 - compulsory arbitration – appeal suspends award Dhlodhlo v Deputy Sheriff & Watershed College HH 76/2011 25.2.3 - see also ‘Appeals – against compulsory arbitration’ - compulsory arbitration (i.t.o.