Results.
7 judgments found.
|
|
|
| December 1997 |
|
|
Whether summary dismissal was lawful where the appellant absented himself and the disciplinary code lacked statutory force.
-
Employment law — Summary dismissal — Absence/desertion — Grievance and Disciplinary Code not gazetted — Master and servant relationship — Resignation ineffective after disciplinary proceedings commenced
|
29 December 1997 |
|
Redundancies implemented without required Works Council approval were void; affected employees awarded damages instead of reinstatement.
-
Employment law — Redundancy — Statutory requirement of Works Council approval (s.108(1)(e) Industrial Relations Act No.36/1990) — failure to obtain prior approval renders redundancies void — accrued rights preserved despite repeal by 1993 Act — remedy where reinstatement impracticable: damages (12 months' pay) with interest — evidentiary weight of minutes and belated approval.
|
12 December 1997 |
|
Reinstatement ordered where dismissal for alleged dishonesty was unproven and procedural fairness absent.
-
Employment law — Wrongful dismissal — Procedural fairness and particulars in disciplinary proceedings — Reinstatement as remedy — Special circumstances where allegations unproven and dismissal carries stigma — Public institution duty to fair play
|
9 December 1997 |
|
Appellants' identification was upheld based on prior acquaintance evidence; convictions and sentences were affirmed.
-
Criminal law — eyewitness identification — mistaken identity — identification parade — reliability and corroboration of identification evidence; appeal against sentence — manifest excess.
|
4 December 1997 |
|
The appellant's challenge to an aggravated robbery conviction failed; possession of the firearm and recovered money established guilt.
-
Criminal law — Aggravated robbery — Identity and possession — Recovery of stolen money and firearm — Evaluation of credibility and ballistic evidence — Appeal dismissed.
|
4 December 1997 |
|
Applicant's late request for a new tenancy was legally incompetent; Supreme Court cannot vary its final judgment for such substantive errors.
-
Civil procedure — correction of judgments — Rule 78: permissible correction limited to clerical errors or accidental slips; not mistakes of law.\nLandlord and Tenant (Business Premises) Act — requests for new tenancy — a late request after expiry of notice is legally incompetent.\nAppeal procedure — omission of consolidated pleadings does not necessarily vitiate a judgment where statutory requirements are not met.
|
2 December 1997 |
|
Court reduced concurrent robbery sentences from 20 to 15 years for leniency and refused petitioners’ application to review prior rulings absent new grounds.
-
Criminal law — Sentencing — Leniency for remorse; reduction of sentence. Constitutional/original jurisdiction — Power of Supreme Court to review its own decisions when sitting as court of first instance; adoption of High Court Order 39 review principles; review permitted only for clerical error, accidental slip, failure to express intention, or material new evidence not previously discoverable; fuller re-argument not a ground for review
|
2 December 1997 |