|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| January 2000 |
|
|
Whether employees who accepted a prior employer offer were entitled to six months' notice and mutatis mutandis 1997 collective agreement benefits.
Collective labour agreements – withdrawal of retirement notices and offer by employer – acceptance by employees – normal versus voluntary retirement entitlements – six months' notice and clause 24.3 benefits – application mutatis mutandis of later collective agreement where notice period extends into its term.
|
27 January 2000 |
|
Publication identifying a public official was defamatory; qualified privilege failed due to reckless publication, damages reduced to K30,000,000.
Defamation – identification of plaintiff – qualified privilege and innocent dissemination – verification of truth – malice inferred from reckless publication – exemplary damages permitted despite limited pleading – reduction of quantum to avoid chilling effect on press.
|
26 January 2000 |
|
Aggravated robbery convictions set aside for lack of evidence; first appellant convicted of receiving stolen property.
Criminal law – Aggravated robbery – Insufficient evidence against co-accused – Possession of stolen motor vehicle supports conviction for receiving stolen property rather than aggravated robbery – Substitution of conviction and reduction of sentence.
|
18 January 2000 |
|
Whether redundancy entitles the respondent to priority in liquidation under s.346; court held no priority and respondent is unsecured.
Company law – Winding-up – Preferential claims under s.346 – Priority for wages, leave and severance limited to amounts accruing within specified periods before commencement of winding-up – redundancy accrued outside statutory periods; employee not a preferential creditor. Civil procedure – Assessment of damages – Appropriateness of nominal damages after execution and computation.
|
13 January 2000 |
|
Employee’s deviation from instructions constituted misuse of employer property; trial court erred in ordering unpleaded reinstatement.
Employment law – summary dismissal – misuse of employer property – employee deviation from instructed route (frolic of his own) – admissibility of reports to show basis of disciplinary decision (hearsay exception) – improper reinstatement where not pleaded.
|
12 January 2000 |