Blog

Benham G. Mombeshora v IAC (Zimbabwe) (SC 72/17

This matter was determined at a time when the Companies Act (Chapter 24.01) was still operational. In 2019, the legislature introduced the Companies and Other Business Entities Act (Chapter 24:31). A perusal of this law shows that the section on … Read the rest

This matter was determined at a time when the Companies Act (Chapter 24.01) was still operational. In 2019, the legislature introduced the Companies and Other Business Entities Act (Chapter 24:31). A perusal of this law shows that the section on the removal of directors is almost identical to the one that was in the now-repealed Companies Act. Besides the new legislation, the remarks of the court, in this case, are still watertight. If an individual is under a contract of employment the Labour Act determines how the relationship with the employer is to end.

This content is for Free Membership members only.
Login Join Now

Thokozile Zinonda v CAFCA Limited SC (64 -17)

What is clear in these provisions is that based on gender, an employer is precluded from differentiating wages and salaries between male employees and female employees. We submit that, perhaps, if the applicant in Thokozile Zinonda v Cafca Limited SC … Read the rest

What is clear in these provisions is that based on gender, an employer is precluded from differentiating wages and salaries between male employees and female employees. We submit that, perhaps, if the applicant in Thokozile Zinonda v Cafca Limited SC 64 -17 had couched her case along the lines of gender discrimination, provided the facts of her case supported this, her prospects of success would have been better.

This content is for Free Membership members only.
Login Join Now

TelOne (Pvt) Ltd v Chigaazira (SC70/17)

Indeed the use of the word “and” between sections 12(B)(3)(B)(i) and (ii) shows that both sub-sections must be interpreted jointly and not separately. It was going to be a different case if the legislature had used a word such as … Read the rest

Indeed the use of the word “and” between sections 12(B)(3)(B)(i) and (ii) shows that both sub-sections must be interpreted jointly and not separately. It was going to be a different case if the legislature had used a word such as “or” which would give a claimant an option to prove legitimate expectation alone without worrying about wether someone was employed in their stead.

This content is for Free Membership members only.
Login Join Now

Ashanti Gold Fields Zimbabwe Ltd v Jafati Mdala (SC 60/17)

The biggest lesson one can learn from this case is that courts are bound by what parties would have agreed. The courts do not have a duty to rewrite contracts as their only role is to give meaning to their … Read the rest

The biggest lesson one can learn from this case is that courts are bound by what parties would have agreed. The courts do not have a duty to rewrite contracts as their only role is to give meaning to their terms. This case confirms what the SC has held in a plethora of cases like Unilever Zimbabwe (Pvt) Ltd v Matsheza[1], Magodora & Others v CARE International Zimbabwe[2]  and Lawrence Shumbayaonda v Madhatter Mining (Private) Limited.[3] Contracts duly agreed upon by the parties will be upheld.

This content is for Free Membership members only.
Login Join Now

Unilever Zimbabwe (Private) Limited v Simbarashe Matsheza (SC16/17)

The Supreme Court, in this case, confirmed the doctrine found in Magodora & Others v CARE International Zimbabwe[1] wherein the court argued that it was not the duty of the courts to rewrite a contract. Employers and employees remain bound … Read the rest

The Supreme Court, in this case, confirmed the doctrine found in Magodora & Others v CARE International Zimbabwe[1] wherein the court argued that it was not the duty of the courts to rewrite a contract. Employers and employees remain bound by what they would have agreed upon for as long as the said agreement did not result from fraud or duress or any other element that attacks the consensus between the parties.

This content is for Free Membership members only.
Login Join Now

Ajasi Wala v Freda Rebecca Mine SC 56 – 16

The case is amongst the countless judgements that posit that when an employee serves his or her personal interests at the expense of the employer’s interests, dismissal is warranted.

Read the rest

The case is amongst the countless judgements that posit that when an employee serves his or her personal interests at the expense of the employer’s interests, dismissal is warranted.

This content is for Paid Content Membership members only.
Login Join Now

Monterey Estate (Private) Limited v Kenny Broxham SC 49 – 16

Repeatedly the Supreme Court has urged the lower courts to substantiate the quantum of damages with the evidence presented by the parties

Read the rest

Repeatedly the Supreme Court has urged the lower courts to substantiate the quantum of damages with the evidence presented by the parties

This content is for Paid Content Membership members only.
Login Join Now

ZB Bank v Maria Masunda SC 48 – 16

If an employee commits an offence that goes to the root of the employment relationship, the employer has the discretion to dismiss the employee.

Read the rest

If an employee commits an offence that goes to the root of the employment relationship, the employer has the discretion to dismiss the employee.

This content is for Paid Content Membership members only.
Login Join Now

The disciplinary hearing and the ancillary processes

This section discusses the several stages one expects to go through when partaking in a disciplinary hearing process. The processes we describe and outline in this section are borrowed from almost every code of conduct that is applicable in Zimbabwe. … Read the rest

This section discusses the several stages one expects to go through when partaking in a disciplinary hearing process. The processes we describe and outline in this section are borrowed from almost every code of conduct that is applicable in Zimbabwe. Employers are under a legal obligation to ensure that they follow all the stages outlined in the disciplinary hearing process. Failure to religiously follow these processes may vitiate the proceedings

This content is for Paid Content Membership members only.
Login Join Now