Law Portal
Zimbabwe

Welcome To Law Portal

Welcome, Guest!
[Help?]

Discipline re: Damages in Lieu of Reinstatement and Reinstatement Orders iro Approach

SC88-05 : OLIVINE INDUSTRIES (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs CAUTION NHARARA
Ruled By: CHEDA JA, MALABA JA and GWAUNZA JA

In a judgment, No.LRT/H/238/2002, dated 26 September 2002, the Labour Relations Tribunal (now the Labour Court) made an order for the reinstatement of the respondent to his employment by the appellant. Part of the order read:“In the event that reinstatement is no longer an option, the respondent be and is ...
More

HB01-12 : NKULULEKO MABHENA vs P.G. INDUSTRIES (ZIM) LIMITED AND P.G. ZIMBOARD PRODUCTS (PVT) LTD AND ANOTHER
Ruled By: KAMOCHA J

Such a claim should have been initiated by way of summons as the claim is mainly for damages allegedly suffered as a result of...
More

SC18-12 : RONI MASEKESA vs KINGDOM FINANCIAL HOLDINGS
Ruled By: ZIYAMBI JA

In Chambers, in terms of Rule 6 of the Supreme Court (Miscellaneous Appeals and References) Rules, 1975….,.The background is as follows.The applicant was employed by the respondent as an Assistant Accountant for 4 years. In February 2004, he was charged with various acts of misconduct including misusing, for an unauthorized purpose, assets belonging to his employer. He ...
More

HB01-12 : NKULULEKO MABHENA vs P.G. INDUSTRIES (ZIM) LIMITED AND P.G. ZIMBOARD PRODUCTS (PVT) LTD AND ANOTHER
Ruled By: KAMOCHA J

The Supreme Court upheld the decision of this court.reinstating him without loss of salary and benefits.The respondents reinstated the applicant to the position of.but the applicant's position before the purported dismissal was that of.What the respondents attempted to do was not in terms of the court order as they were demoting the applicant to a ...
More

SC01-12 : AMERICAN FRIENDS SERVICE COMMITTEE vs IRENE CHAUKE
Ruled By: GARWE JA, OMERJEE AJA and GOWORA AJA

The second issue for determination is whether or not the court a quo misdirected itself in confirming the award made by the arbitrator on the quantum of damages due to the respondent. The record shows that there was no evidence upon which the arbitrator based his award other than an unsubstantiated statement of claim ...
More

SC05-12 : MASHONALAND TURF CLUB vs GEORGE MUTANGADURA
Ruled By: ZIYAMBI JA, GARWE JA and GOWORA AJA

Alternatively, it was contended that the order made by the arbitrator was defective in that it made no award of damages as an alternative to reinstatement as required by section 89(2)(c)(iii) of the Labour Act and that the court a quo misdirected itself in upholding the order.
More

SC00-89 : ART CORPORATION LTD vs MOYANA
Ruled By: GUBBAY JA, McNALLY JA and MANYARARA JA

This is a labour dispute between the parties. A brief history of the matter is as follows:The appellant (the Corporation) employed the respondent (Mr Moyana) on 20 October 1980 as a Marketing Executive. The contract was a simple one, providing that his functions were to be assigned to him from ...
More

SC57-05 : FIRST BANKING CORPORATION LTD vs BALTHAZAR MARIMO
Ruled By: SANDURA JA, ZIYAMBI JA and GWAUNZA JA

This is an appeal against a judgment of the Labour Court in terms of which that court quantified the amount of damages payable by the appellant (“the Bank”) to the respondent (“Marimo”), in lieu of reinstatement.The relevant factual background may be tabulated as follows:1. On 1 May 1997, Marimo joined ...
More

SC50-13 : TELECEL ZIMBABWE (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs SIBANGANI MABORE
Ruled By: MALABA DCJ, ZIYAMBI JA and HLATSHWAYO JA

This is an appeal from the Labour Court. It concerns the law relating to the assessment of damages consequent upon the unlawful dismissal of an employee. At the end of the hearing of the appeal the following order was issued: “1. The appeal is allowed with costs. 2. The judgment of the court a quo is ...
More

SC53-13 : CENTRAL AFRICA BATTERIES vs JOHN MHANGU
Ruled By: MALABA DCJ, ZIYAMBI JA and CHEDA JA

The unanimous view of the court is that the appeal is allowed. The reasons are as follows. It is common cause that the respondent was unlawfully suspended from employment on 5 January 1998. On 9 September 2002, he took up employment elsewhere thus repudiating his contract of employment with the appellant. It is common cause that during the ...
More

SC64-14 : CENTRAL AFRICAN BATTERIES vs JOHN MHANGU
Ruled By: GARWE JA, GOWORA JA and HLATSHWAYO JA

On 5 April 2012, the Labour Court granted a judgment in favour of the respondent (applicant in the Labour Court) as follows: “1. The respondent be and is hereby ordered to pay damages to the applicant in the amount of United States Dollars 12,575=78. 2. There shall be no order as to costs.” The appellant was aggrieved by ...
More

SC51-14 : MADHATTER MINING COMPANY vs MARVELLOUS TAPFUMA
Ruled By: GWAUNZA JA, GOWORA JA and HLATSHWAYO JA

This is an appeal against the whole of the judgment of the Labour Court given at Gweru on 13 January 2012. The application in the court a quo was brought by the respondent against the appellant and was for quantification of damages following a consent order dated 20 September 2006. The terms of the ...
More

SC58-15 : ERICKSON MVUDUDU vs AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Ruled By: MALABA DCJ, GWAUNZA JA and PATEL JA

This is an appeal against a judgment of the Labour Court dismissing an appeal against an award rendered by an arbitrator. That arbitral award quantified the damages payable to the appellant pursuant to an earlier award ordering his reinstatement into the service of the respondent.BackgroundThe respondent is a statutory body established under the Agricultural ...
More

HH254-10 : TAAZADZA MUNHUMUTEMA vs JOSHUA TAPAMBWA and SYDNEY KAZHANJE and STANBIC BANK ZIMBABWE LIMITED
Ruled By: MUTEMA J

In Standard Chartered Bank Zimbabwe Ltd v Matsika 1997 (2) ZLR 389 it was held that from an order of reinstatement the following consequences are said to flow- (a) The employee is entitled to be replaced in his post; (b) There is no obligation on the employer to provide him with work; (c) The employer must continue ...
More

HH08-11 : ANATOS MPOFU vs COMMISSIONER OF POLICE and POLICE SERVICES COMMISSION
Ruled By: KARWI J

With regard to the issue of whether or not the applicant should be reinstated or paid compensation in lieu of reinstatement, the applicant's initial view, as presented by his then legal practitioner, was that the preferred option was one of reinstatement. The reason given, at the time, was mainly that it was difficult to assess or calculate ...
More

SC22-13 : FARM COMMUNITY TRUST vs CLAUDIOUS CHEMHERE
Ruled By: GARWE JA, GOWORA JA and OMERJEE AJA

On the issue of damages, it is common cause that neither party adduced evidence before the arbitrator. It is settled law that damages are meant to place the employee in the position he would have occupied had the contract of employment not been terminated, subject to the duty upon him to mitigate his loss. ...
More

HB103-14 : MANDLA KHANYE & OTHERS and SHAME MUTUNGURA and LIVER MDLONGWA vs INGWEBU BREWERIES
Ruled By: KAMOCHA J

The applicants in this matter sought to register an arbitral award relating to them in terms of section 98(14) of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:06]. The applicants had been awarded two different awards on different dates. The first award, dated 2 June 2006, provided as follows:- “Award (1) The employees are reinstated without any loss of pay and ...
More

View Appeal
SC09-15 : INTER-AGRIC (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs ALLAN MUDAVANHU AND TWELVE OTHERS
Ruled By: MALABA DCJ, GOWORA JA and HLATSHWAYO JA

Turning to the award of damages, it should have been obvious to the learned President in the court a quo that there was no evidence of damages led before the arbitrator. It is well settled that in the assessment of damages for unlawful dismissal, an arbitrator or a court is not entitled to pluck ...
More

SC38-15 : DELTA BEVERAGES (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs KUDAKWASHE MURANDU
Ruled By: GWAUNZA JA, HLATSHWAYO JA and CHIWESHE AJA

The undisputed facts are these. On 2 August 2000, the respondent, who was in the appellant's employ, was suspended from work for alleged misconduct pending the determination of an application by the appellant to dismiss him (application made in terms of S.I.37 of 1985 which was then applicable.). On 12 July 2002, a labour officer ...
More

SC52-15 : TRIANGLE LIMITED vs VUSIMUSU SIGAUKE
Ruled By: ZIYAMBI JA, HLATSHWAYO JA and MAVANGIRA AJA

2. Whether the court, in ordering the reinstatement of the respondent, failed to apply the law which unequivocally requires an employee who has been unlawfully dismissed to seek alternative employment. Two legal principles were violated by the order of the court a quo. (i) The first is that when a court makes an order ...
More

SC01-16 : NATIONAL ENGINEERING WORKERS UNION (NEWU) vs NTOMBIZODWA DUBE
Ruled By: GWAUNZA JA, HLATSHWAYO JA and MAVANGIRA AJA

2. Order for payment of damages in the absence of evidence on that issue Having determined, as I have done, that the disciplinary hearing in casu was conducted before a properly constituted disciplinary authority, the question arises as to the competency of the award of damages granted to the respondent by the court a ...
More

SC48-16 : ZB BANK vs MARIA MASUNDA
Ruled By: ZIYAMBI JA, GOWORA JA and GUVAVA JA

In any event, the Order of the court a quo was incompetent as it sought to order the National Employment Council to reinstate the respondent without making a corresponding order for damages in the event that reinstatement was no longer possible. This Order did not comply with the law. In terms of section 89(2)(c)(iii) of ...
More

SC49-16 : MONTEREY ESTATE (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs KENNY BROXHAM
Ruled By: MALABA DCJ, ZIYAMBI JA and MAVANGIRA AJA

This is an appeal against the quantum of damages in lieu of reinstatement that was awarded to the respondent by the arbitrator and upheld, on appeal, by the Labour Court. The respondent was employed by the appellant as a Farm Manager in November 2008. On 30 November 2009, without any prior warning, the respondent, through ...