Law Portal
Zimbabwe

Welcome To Law Portal

Welcome, Guest!
[Help?]

Appeal, Leave to Appeal, Leave to Execute Pending Appeal re: Grounds of Appeal iro Labour Proceedings

SC30-08 : DANAI GURUVA vs TRAFFIC SAFETY COUNCIL OF ZIMBABWE
Ruled By: SANDURA JA, CHEDA JA and GWAUNZA JA

The appellant is employed by the Traffic Safety Council of Zimbabwe as a Regional Manager. He was based at their Gweru office from where he was transferred to the Masvingo office.The dispute which led to this case arose from his lateral transfer from Gweru to Masvingo.On 14 November 2003, the ...
More

SC27-09 : CLAUDIUS MURAWO vs GRAIN MARKETING BOARD
Ruled By: SANDURA JA, CHEDA JA and GWAUNZA JA

This is an appeal against a judgment of the Labour Court which dismissed an appeal by the appellant (“Murawo”) against the termination of his contract of employment by the respondent, the Grain Marketing Board (“the GMB”).The background facts are as follows:Murawo was employed by the GMB as a Safety, Health ...
More

SC32-09 : VIMBAI MBISVA vs RAINBOW TOURISM GROUP LIMITED t/a RAINBOW HOTEL & TOWERS
Ruled By: SANDURA JA, ZIYAMBI JA and MALABA JA

This is an appeal against a judgment of the Labour Court which set aside an arbitral award made in favour of the appellant.The background facts may be tabulated conveniently as follows:1. The appellant (“Vimbai”) was employed by the respondent (“the Hotel”) as a supervisor.2. On 18 January 2005 the Hotel ...
More

Appealed
SC20-12 : ZIMBABWE OPEN UNIVERSITY vs GIDEON MAGARAMOMBE and DEPUTY SHERIFF HARARE N.O.
Ruled By: CHIDYAUSIKU CJ

Section 98(10) of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01] provides as follows:"98 Effect of reference to compulsory arbitration under Parts XI and XII(10) An appeal on a question of law shall lie to the Labour Court from any decision of an arbitrator appointed in terms of this section."Section 98 of the ...
More

SC43-15 : DON NYAMANDE and KINGSTONE DONGA vs ZUVA PETROLEUM (PRIVATE) LIMITED
Ruled By: CHIDYAUSIKU CJ, GWAUNZA JA, GARWE JA, HLATSHWAYO JA and GUVAVA JA

The appellants were aggrieved by the judgment of the Labour Court and now appeal to this court on the following grounds - “The Labour Court erred, and seriously misdirected itself on a question of law by upholding the termination of the appellants' contracts of employment on notice, and failing to find such termination to be unfair ...
More

SC46-15 : NATIONAL RAILWAYS OF ZIMBABWE vs ZIMBABWE RAILWAYS ARTISANS UNION AND OTHERS
Ruled By: ZIYAMBI JA, GWAUNZA JA and GUVAVA JA

The grounds of appeal are far from clear and concise.
More

SC30-14 : RICHARD CHAYIKOSA vs THE CITY OF HARARE
Ruled By: MALABA DCJ

I have carefully examined the contents of the documents filed of record. The first point to note is that, whilst the applicant complains of having been dismissed by a disciplinary body constituted by employees of the Council, he does not allege that they wrongfully found him guilty of the misconduct charged. An examination of ...
More

SC48-14 : ZIMTILE (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs CHINTENGO and 64 OTHERS
Ruled By: ZIYAMBI JA

An application for leave to appeal in terms of section 92F(3) of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01]. This application was brought before me in chambers in terms of Rule 5 of the Supreme Court Rules.
More

SC69-14 : CHARLES KAKURIRA vs NATIONAL RAILWAYS OF ZIMBABWE
Ruled By: MALABA DCJ

The applicant is seeking leave to appeal against a decision of the Labour Court dismissing an appeal from a decision of the General Manager of the respondent. The General Manager upheld the finding by the disciplinary hearing committee that the applicant stole the respondent's property. He was dismissed from employment. The learned Senior President of ...
More

SC16-15 : ELINETH DICK vs ZIMBABWE REVENUE AUTHORITY
Ruled By: GWAUNZA JA, GOWORA JA and GUVAVA JA

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Labour Court handed down on 17 January 2013.The brief facts of the matter may be summarized as follows. The appellant was employed by the respondent as a manager in its Audit Department. She was allocated for her use, a computer which had an internet ...
More

SC28-15 : ZINWA vs JOSEPH MWOYOUNOTSVA
Ruled By: ZIYAMBI JA, GWAUNZA JA and HLATSHWAYO JA

This is an appeal from a judgment of the Labour Court (KACHAMBWA P) which upheld an arbitral ward against the appellant. It is the appellant's contention that the Arbitrator, sitting as an appeal court, erred in law when it interfered with findings of fact made by the Disciplinary Committee of the appellant ...
More

SC60-15 : SIMON GAZI vs NATIONAL RAILWAYS OF ZIMBABWE
Ruled By: ZIYAMBI JA, GWAUNZA JA and MAVANGIRA AJA

This is an appeal against the entire judgment of the Labour Court, handed down on 6 August 2013. The background to the dispute is aptly summarized as follows in the judgment of the court a quo; “1.Appellant was employed by respondent as a painter. He was dismissed from respondent's employ on 10 November 2009 following a ...
More

SC44-15 : JAINOS ZVOKUSEKWA vs BIKITA RURAL DISTRICT COUNCIL
Ruled By: ZIYAMBI JA, GARWE JA and HLATSHWAYO JA

In a judgment delivered on 16 April 2013, the Labour Court set aside an award made by an arbitrator reinstating the appellant to his former position without loss of salary or benefits. In its place, the Labour Court substituted a finding that the appellant was guilty of gross negligence and withholding information. In consequence of ...
More

SC23-12 : MIMOSA MINING COMPANY vs STANLEY SAMUKANGE
Ruled By: MALABA DCJ, GOWORA JA and OMERJEE AJA

A point in limine was taken by counsel for the respondent as to whether the ground of appeal raised a point of law. The court is satisfied that the point in limine is unsustainable. The ground of appeal clearly relates to the question whether the court a quo correctly interpreted what constitutes negligence and ...
More

SC21-13 : AUGUSTINE M. TIRIVANGANA vs THE UNIVERSITY OF ZIMBABWE
Ruled By: GARWE JA, GOWORA JA and OMERJEE AJA

The Labour Court was also criticised before us for determining an issue that was not before it as an appeal. The arbitrator did not delve into the disciplinary proceedings instituted by the respondent against the appellant. The record reflects that the arbitrator commented on those proceedings in passing but made no finding one way or ...
More

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

An appeal from the Labour Court to the Supreme Court, with leave of the Labour Court or the Supreme Court, lies only on a point of law. What constitutes a point of law was described in Muzuva v United Bottlers (Pvt) Ltd 1994 (1) ZLR 217 (S) in the following terms: “The twin concepts, questions ...
More

SC27-13 : SHECKEM BARRISTER NGAZIMBI vs MUROWA DIAMONDS (PVT) LTD
Ruled By: MALABA DCJ, ZIYAMBI JA and OMERJEE AJA

The second point in limine taken by counsel for the respondent was that the grounds of appeal do not raise questions of law as required by section 92F of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01]….,. Having come to the conclusion that there is no appeal before the Court, it became unnecessary to decide whether the grounds of ...
More

SC31-13 : LAWSIGN NYARUMBU vs SANDVIK MINING AND CONSTRUCTION ZIMBABWE (PVT) LTD
Ruled By: ZIYAMBI JA, GARWE JA and PATEL AJA

After hearing argument from counsel, we allowed the appeal in this matter and made the following order:1. The appeal is allowed with costs.2. The judgment of the Labour Court is hereby set aside and substituted as follows:(i) The appeal is dismissed with costs.(ii) The appellant shall reinstate the respondent to ...
More

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

Although the appellant, in its grounds of appeal complained that the award by the Labour Court induced a sense of shock and was contrary to public policy it did not advance any argument in support of those grounds.
More

SC05-15 : INNSCOR AFRICA (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs TERRENCE GWATIDZO
Ruled By: ZIYAMBI JA, GWAUNZA JA and PATEL JA

A further aspect, arising from submissions made by counsel at the hearing of the matter, relates to the penalty that was imposed upon the respondent. It was contended on behalf of the respondent that the penalty of dismissal was unduly harsh on the facts of the case, and, additionally, that it did not conform ...
More

SC18-15 : OLIVINE INDUSTRIES (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs B. SHONHIWA and F. GARATSA and P. ZARANYIKA
Ruled By: ZIYAMBI JA, GWAUNZA JA and PATEL JA

For reasons not apparent from the record, the court a quo ordered that each party should bear its own costs. Since the appellant has not specifically implored this Court to substitute the Labour Court's order in this respect with a different order as to costs, that order will be maintained….,. 1….,. 2. Each party ...
More

SC35-15 : ELIAS CHIDEMBO vs BINDURA NICKEL CORPORATION LIMITED
Ruled By: GWAUNZA JA, HLATSHWAYO JA and MAVANGIRA AJA

This is an appeal against the decision of the Labour Court which upheld the dismissal of the appellant from his employment with the respondent.The factual circumstances of this matter are common cause.The appellant was in the employ of Bindura Nickel Corporation Limited and served as a workers' committee chairman. He ...
More

SC44-15 : JAINOS ZVOKUSEKWA vs BIKITA RURAL DISTRICT COUNCIL
Ruled By: ZIYAMBI JA, GARWE JA and HLATSHWAYO JA

As regards the finding that the appellant was guilty of withholding evidence, I agree with the appellant that this was not an issue that had been raised by the respondent in its grounds of appeal against the award made by the arbitrator. Accordingly, it was not competent for the court to deal with that issue ...
More

SC09-16 : PETER MAFUNDA vs ZIMBABWE ENERGY REGULATORY AUTHORITY
Ruled By: HLATSHWAYO JA, MAVANGIRA JA and UCHENA JA

Counsel for the respondent submitted that there is no valid appeal before the court as there is no appeal on a point of law….,. Counsel for the respondent's submission that there is no appeal on a point of law has no merit. The appeal is against the court a quo's interpretation of section 14 ...
More

SC22-17 : EDWARD MISIHAIRAMBWI and 14 OTHERS vs AFRICARE ZIMBABWE
Ruled By: ZIYAMBI JA, BHUNU JA and UCHENA JA

In addition, however, the prayer in the notice of appeal before us is defective. The appellant prayed that the appeal be allowed with costs against the respondent and for the judgment of the court a quo to be substituted with: “The matter is remitted back to the court a quo for determination on the ...
More

SC36-16 : TN HARLEQUIN LUXAIRE vs WINSTON MHONDA and FUNGAI KATSVAIRO
Ruled By: GARWE JA, MAVANGIRA JA and UCHENA JA

THE COURT A QUO'S DECISION ON QUESTIONS OF FACT The evidence led before the hearing committee which the NEC Appeals Committee and the Labour Court relied on does not disclose how it could be said that the court a quo misdirected itself in the manner alleged in grounds of appeal Nos.1, 2, 5 and 6. The ...
More

SC29-18 : RESERVE BANK OF ZIMBABWE vs T. LLOYD MUFUDZI and RICHARD USEYA and NYASHA CHIKAZAZA and WARAIDZO TANDI
Ruled By: GOWORA JA, BHUNU JA and ZIYAMBI AJA

In terms of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01], an appeal on a point of law only, lay, with leave, to the Supreme Court. Section 92F(1) of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01] provides that an appeal on a question of law only shall lie to the Supreme Court from any decision of the Labour Court….,. Merely using the words 'erred ...
More

SC48-20 : EMMA KUNDISHORA vs ZIMBABWE RED CROSS SOCIETY
Ruled By: HLATSHAWO JA, MAKONI JA and BERE JA

It is settled law that an Appellate Court can only interfere with the findings of fact made by a lower court in exceptional circumstances.In Hama v National Railways of Zimbabwe 1996 (1) ZLR 664 (S)…, KORSAH JA remarked:“The general rule of the law, as regards irrationality, is that an Appellate ...
More

SC62-20 : THANDO NCUBE vs FIDELITY PRINTERS AND REFINERIES (PRIVATE) LIMITED
Ruled By: MAKARAU JA

This is an application for leave to appeal against a decision of the Labour Court, handed down on 27 October 2014, dismissing with costs, an appeal to that court against a decision of the respondent dismissing the appellant from employment.Leave to appeal was denied by the Labour Court on the ...
More

SC78-20 : ADMIRE DAMANJERA vs ZIMBABWE REVENUE AUTHORITY
Ruled By: GARWE JA, GUVAVA JA and MATHONSI JA

This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the Labour Court delivered on 14 July 2017 which dismissed with costs an appeal launched in that Court by the appellant against the decision of the respondent's Appeals Committee dated 20 July 2016.The Appeals Committee upheld the decision of the respondent's ...
More

SC73-17 : TENDAYI TAMANIKWA and FRANK TINARWO vs ZIMBABWE MANPOWER DEVELOPMENT FUND and EMMERSON PAMIRE
Ruled By: GWAUNZA JA, BHUNU JA and UCHENA JA

This is an appeal coupled with a cross-appeal against the judgment of the Labour Court.Both appellants, in the main appeal, and the respondent in the cross appeal, Emmerson Pamire, were employed by the respondent. Following leakages of confidential information at the work place, the respondent ordered them to sign declaration ...
More

SC08-11 : ERIC FILON vs PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION and THE SECRETARY FOR WATER RESOURCES
Ruled By: CHIDYAUSIKU CJ

Section 92F of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01]..., provides:"92F Appeals against decisions of Labour Court(1) An appeal on a question of law only shall lie to the Supreme Court from any decision of the Labour Court.(2) Any party wishing to appeal from any decision of the Labour Court on a ...
More

SC39-00 : E. FILON vs THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION and THE MINISTER OF LANDS AND WATER RESOURCES
Ruled By: GUBBAY CJ, McNALLY JA and EBRAHIM JA

The appellant was discharged from the Public Service. He had been suspended from duty by the Secretary to his Minister, and, later, served with charges to which were attached certain documents. The letter containing the charges was signed by a Mr Moyo on behalf of the Secretary to the Ministry.The ...
More

HH76-11 : SIBANGALIZWE DHLODHLO vs DEPUTY SHERIFF FOR MARONDERA and SHERIFF FOR ZIMBABWE and KANTOR & IMMERMAN and WATERSHED COLLEGE
Ruled By: GOWORA J

It is trite that a litigant who is dissatisfied with a judgment or decision may appeal against that judgment or decision.Appeals under the Labour Act are governed by that Act. Section 92D of the Labour Act provides:"A person who is aggrieved by a determination made under an employment code, may, ...
More

SC11-21 : TENDAI BONDE vs NATIONAL FOODS LTD and LOVEJOY NYANDORO [as Chairman of Appeals Committee] and CHIPO NHETA [as Chairman of Works Council]
Ruled By: GUVAVA JA

This is an application for leave to appeal from a judgment of the Labor Court. The court a quo found no merit in the application for leave to appeal and dismissed it, on the main, that, the draft notice of appeal did not raise questions of law.The applicant was dissatisfied ...
More

SC04-18 : ZIMBABWE REVENUE AUTHORITY vs CHESTER MUDZIMUWAONA
Ruled By: CHIDYAUSIKU CJ, GOWORA JA and MUTEMA AJA

This was an appeal against the whole judgment of the Labour Court delivered on 17 May 2012. After perusing the record and hearing the submissions of the parties, this Court allowed the appeal and indicated that the reasons would be availed in due course.The following are the reasons for the ...
More

SC13-21 : MOSES MAWIRE vs RIO ZIM LIMITED (PRIVATE) LIMITED
Ruled By: GOWORA JA, PATEL JA and MAVANGIRA JA

After hearing the parties on 9 March 2018, the court was of the unanimous view that the appeal was devoid of any merit and accordingly ordered as follows:“The appeal be and is hereby dismissed with costs. Full reasons will be available in due course.”The following are the reasons:BACKGROUND FACTSThe appellant ...
More

SC64-21 : PATRICK MANJOVHA vs DELTA BEVERAGES (PRIVATE) LIMITED
Ruled By: GWAUNZA DCJ, HLATSHWAYO JA and BHUNU JA

It being an entrenched position in our law that one appeals against the order of court and not the reasons...,.
More

SC67-21 : COSSAM CHIANGWA and OTHERS vs APOSTOLIC FAITH MISSION IN ZIMBABWE and OTHERS
Ruled By: MAVANGIRA JA, MAKONI JA and KUDYA AJA

This is an appeal against the entire judgment of the High Court, dated 4 September 2019, in which the court a quo granted a declaratur and consequential relief sought by the respondents against the appellants and dismissed the application for a declaratur sought by the appellants against the respondents.The order ...
More

SC93-21 : RINOS TERERA vs GEORGE LOCK and CK HOLLAND t/a HOLLAND ESTATE AGENT and ZIMBABWE HOUSING COMPANY (PVT) LTD and THE REGISTRAR OF DEEDS
Ruled By: CHITAKUNYE AJA

For an appeal to enjoy any prospects of success it must attack the findings of the court a quo on the issues before it for determination.Grounds of appeal that do not address or attack the findings upon which the determination was made would have no prospects of success at all.
More

View Appeal
SC130-21 : PHILIPPA COUMBIS vs RONALD COUMBIS and DOVES FUNERAL ASSURANCE (PVT) LTD
Ruled By: GARWE JA, GOWORA JA and UCHENA JA

This Court cannot, on appeal, make a decision on an issue the court a quo did not consider as it was not raised before it.
More

SC07-17 : CHRIS STYLIANOU and FRED DRIVER AND SONS (PVT) LTD and D.R. HENDRY (PVT) LTD vs MOSES MUBITA AND 25 OTHERS
Ruled By: GWAUNZA JA, GUVAVA JA and BHUNU JA

The appeal was brought on nine grounds. However, a number of the grounds were struck out for not being concise as required by the Rules of this court, for containing argument or for making no sense at all.It hardly needs re-emphasizing, that, grounds of appeal must conform to laid down ...
More

SC137-21 : ZIMBABWE NEWSPAPERS (1980) LIMITED vs TEMBANI KUFA
Ruled By: MAKARAU JA, GOWORA JA and MATHONSI JA

The delay in handing down judgment in this matter, especially considering the manner in which the matter will be disposed of, is most sincerely regretted.The appellant employed the respondent as a Security Officer.It has appealed against the entire judgment of the Labour Court (“the court a quo”) handed down on ...
More

SC143-21 : HAPPISON MUCHECHETERE vs ZIMBABWE BROADCASTING CORPORATION (PVT) LTD and RETIRED JUSTICE JAMES DEVITTE N.O. and GIBSON MUNYORO
Ruled By: GWAUNZA DCJ, UCHENA JA and MAKONI JA

This is an appeal against the entire judgment of the Labour Court handed down on 10 March 2017. The Labour Court dismissed the appellant's application for review challenging the disciplinary proceedings that led to his dismissal from the first respondent's employment.There were no appearances for the second and third respondents.FACTUAL ...