(Original/TAN/CMA/28/2008)

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "(Original/TAN/CMA/28/2008)"

Transcription

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA LABOUR DIVISION AT TANGA LABOUR REVISION NO 82 OF 2010 SAFI MEDICS APPLICANT VERSUS 1. ROSE PETER 2. MGANGA MUSSA 3. RICHARD KARATA.. RESPONDENTS (Original/TAN/CMA/28/2008) RULING 8/3/2011 & 17/5/2011 RWEYEMAMU R.M. J: The applicant/employer timely filed an application supported by affidavit for revision of the CMA award procured on 5/3/2010. The same was presented by a chamber summons brought under section 91 (1) (a) and (3) of the Employment and Labour Relations Act, 6/2004 and rule 28 (1) (c) (d) and (e) of the Labour Court rules, GN 106/2007. In response, the respondent filed a counter affidavit and a notice of Preliminary Objection (PO) against the application subject matter of this ruling on grounds: That the Revision Application is incompetent for non compliance of Rule 24(1), (2) and (3) of the Labour Court Rules. I will first address this PO. 1

2 The proper procedure for a party wishing to revise an arbitrator s award is to move the court under section 91(1) of the Act read together with rule 28 of the rules which prescribe powers of the court in exercising its revision jurisdiction. This court however has taken a conflicting stance regarding the proper procedure for initiating revision proceedings in this court. The two positions were discussed in among others, the case of TPAWU vs. Robert Korinako, Revision No. 109 of The 1 st position was pronounced by Hon. Mandia J., as he then was, (now JA) in COCA COLA Kwanza LTD vs Emmanuel Mollel, Application No. 22/2008 and adopted by Hon. Moshi J. in PLY and Panel (T) LTD TANGA vs Hamad Kassim, Labour Revision No. 286/2008- (delivered on 3/11/2009). The Hon Judge held among others that: the LC rules do not provide for a procedure to be followed in filing an application for revision under rule 28; and therefore that the said void (lacuna) can be filled by adopting mutatis mutandis, the procedure provided for review under rule 26 of the rules, which though a different category, are put together under the same part of the rules. In Robert Korinako, I explained the 2 nd position as follows: My understanding of rule 24 of the rules is that, the same provides for a procedure for making any application to the court, and specifically covering applications not specifically provided for under the rules (rule 24 (11) (b). That rule prescribes the procedure as to file a notice of application which substantially complies with the prescribed Form No 4 (part of the schedule to the rules), supported by affidavit. That rule goes on to provide for filing of a notice of opposition /counter affidavit or both by 2

3 the opposing party. Now rule 28 provides that the court may---on application by any party revise an award. In my opinion, an application for revision is one of the categories of applications envisaged under rule 24 of the rules, and therefore there is no lacuna the procedure to be followed in applying for revision, is that prescribed under rule 24 In a recent decision of Bonite Bottlers LTD Vs William Issa, Revision 163/2009, I observed before dismissing a PO raised due to non-citation of rule 24 that; on the main, applications for revision are now brought as per rule 24 but despite my said decision, it is in view of the conflicting stance taken by the court I decide that it would be unfair to dismiss an application for revision where a party has moved the court using the 1 st position. I now extend that reasoning and hold that until the position is clarified by a higher court or the LC rules are amended, (hopefully concerned authorities will soon address the issue) it would be unfair to penalize a party for non-citation of rule 24 while initiating revision proceedings in a situation like the present, where both the enabling section 91 of the Act and rule 28 of the LC rules have been cited. It is in view of that reasoning that I dismiss the respondent s PO. Turning to the substantive application, the decision I have reached will be best appreciated if I preface the parties arguments with the following rather detailed background: 3

4 1. The respondents filed a dispute of unfair termination against their employer alleging that they were suspended for unknown reasons. Initially, this dispute was referred to the CMA on 22/2/2008, registered as TAN/CMA/28/2008 and supposedly mediated. That mediation was disputed by the respondents who filed an application for revision registered in this court as Revision No. 88/2008. Thereafter, the Registrar made an order for the matter to commence afresh at the CMA, following which the respondents filed Misc. case No. 3/2008 ultimately dismissed by the CMA as being res-judicata. 2. Dissatisfied, the respondents applied for revision of that CMA order registered as Revision No. 45/2009. In the decision delivered on 6/11/2009, Hon. Moshi J. quashed the Registrar s orders for being made without jurisdiction, as well as the CMA decision made following the Registrar s order for being based on a wrong interpretation of the law. The dispute was ordered to be processed afresh by the CMA. 3. The dispute commenced afresh at the CMA where it was registered as Original/TAN/CMA/28/2008. That is the proceedings that led to the impugned award issued on 5/3/2010. That makes this the 3 rd time the dispute is before this court. The CMA record of proceedings shows that before commencement of arbitration, the applicant stated that they did not have the amended Form No 1- the referral form, the respondents were then ordered to prove the applicant was served with the amended Form No 1 otherwise the 4

5 Form filed on 22/2/2008 will be used as the basis of the complaint. It would appear they did not comply because the form referred to in the award was the one filed on 22/2/ At arbitration no issues were framed, but what can be gathered from the facts adduced and those summarized in the award, the respondent/employees claim appears to have been that they were suspended (kusimamishwa kazi) not terminated (kusimamishwa kazi). The reliefs prayed for were; to be given termination letters; payment of salary from 1/12/2007 at the current minimum wage which they put at shillings Rose= 53,000/=; Karata shillings 48,000/= and Mganga shillings 48,000/=. 5. The applicant/employer case was that the employees were properly terminated because they were paid 1 month s salary in lieu of notice; that they were ready to pay the respondents their February 2008 salary and to reinstate them if they so wished. 6. The arbitrator decided that quashed the employer s termination letters as having been issued contrary to law; and ordered that: a. The respondents should be paid their full salary from 1/12/2007 to date of payment including all their benefits as per their contracts; monies already paid as terminal benefits to be set off. b. Thereafter, the applicant can terminate the respondents according to law c. Payments to the respondents should be as per minimum wage which was by then not below 80,000/=is. 5

6 d. The applicant could choose to reinstate the respondents provided if that option was taken, the intention should be communicated in writing within 14 days from date of delivery of the award. e. The arbitrator then decided that the payments due was: Rose Peter s was total of TShs. 7,105,800/= being 26 months salary at rate of shillings 134,000/= house rent, transport allowance, interest at 15%; NSSF contribution plus the increase until payment in full, Bwana Karata 80,000/= times 26 months, house rent shiilings 20,000/= with the rest like the above, total shillings 4, 816, 600/= Bw. Mussa total shs 4, /= on items like those immediately above (the names used in the award) Total shillings 16,731000/= At the hearing of this application, both parties adopted grounds contained in their affidavits/counter affidavits and added little by way of substantiation. The applicant s grounds were in summary that: First, the arbitrator awarded the sum he did despite the fact that salaries of the respondents prior to the dispute were 53,000/=, 48,000/= and 48,000/= respectively, the amount they asked for in the claim. My response is that this is factually true as demonstrated in paragraph 4 above. Second, the amount awarded (6 (e) above) was despite his finding that the minimum wage was 80,000/= and it had no basis. Third, there was no basis for the other claims awarded like transport, 6

7 house allowance, unremitted NSSF contribution etc because they were not pleaded in the referral form. Again I find the point to be valid. I have checked the Form referred to in the award and note that the other claims awarded were not pleaded, further, from the recorded of arbitration proceedings; the claims were not raised nor was evidence led to lay the basis for their grant. In view of that, I find the applicants averment that they were denied a chance to be heard on such claims to be justified. After going through the CMA record of proceedings and considering the applicants grounds of complaints, it is obvious to me that arbitration in this case was conducted with material irregularity namely failure by the arbitrator to observe one of the critical stage in conduct of arbitration being that; issues in dispute were not clearly identified and known to the parties before they presented facts and evidence in support/opposition of the claim. A successful arbitration requires that both the arbitrator and the parties in the dispute have a common understanding of the issues in controversy. Principles to guide the conduct of arbitration are prescribed under rule 18 to 22 of the Labour Institutions (Mediation and Arbitration Guidelines) Rules, GN 67/2007. Rule 22 thereof prescribes necessary stages of arbitration. At this stage, I find it useful to repeat what I stated in a case with a similar irregularity that: The substantive law governing conduct and procedure of arbitration proceedings is section 88 (4) and (5) of the Employment and Labour 7

8 Relations Act, 6/2004 (the Act).That section provides that the arbitrator has discretion to choose the appropriate form for conducting arbitration proceedings the key focus being to deal with substantial merits of the case with a minimum of legal formalities. That is, unlike in ordinary court trials, under arbitration issues in question are dealt with fairly but quickly and informally. That provision is to be read together with Rule 19 and 22 of the Labour Institutions (Mediation and Arbitration) Guidelines, GN 67/2007 (the Guidelines). Rule 19 of the Guidelines prescribes powers of the arbitrator; while providing for stages of arbitration proceedings, it emphasizes the arbitrator s discretion such that the stages of arbitration provided under rule 22 are made subject to that discretion. The import of rule 22 is to ensure parties to the dispute are granted a right to fair hearing. That necessarily means; issues to be arbitrated should be clear to the parties; the parties should have opportunity to present evidence; call witnesses and cross examine them if they so choose; present arguments for their cases and finally, based on that the arbitrator s award should contain reasons for the decision. In brief what is crucial is that; arbitration is conducted in a swift manner yet remains in accord with principles of natural justice. That is, the parties know the nature of the case and are accorded a right to be heard; that the resultant award is not arbitrary but based on the record and therefore it contains reasons for the decision reached and justification for the reliefs granted. The guidelines are not meant to prescribe mandatory stages but rather they provide guidance for achieving the crucial objective of arbitration. How exactly the arbitrator uses discretion in adopting the guidelines depends on the nature of the dispute between the parties. Where for example the issues in dispute are very clear to the parties, for example, where the same are well articulated in the non- 8

9 settlement certificate issued by the mediator, it may not be necessary for the arbitrator to adhere strictly to the stages provided under rule 22. On the other hand; where the case is complex, involving a number of issues and the parties are unrepresented, adhering to the stages provided under the guidelines is the sure way of arbitrating the dispute fairly. See The GM Pangea Minerals V. Migumo Mwakalasa, LC Revision 35/2008. From the CMA record of arbitration proceedings and reasoning in the award, it is clear fundamental principles which make for a legal arbitration proceedings were not adhered to. In view of that, I agree with the applicant that the arbitrator exercised his jurisdiction with material irregularity and with errors material to the merits of the case. While I am not oblivious of the fact that this dispute has already taken too long to come to finality, I still find that a just determination of the rights of the parties in this case dictate that a proper arbitration be conducted. I accordingly quash the CMA proceedings and subsequent award, and order arbitration conducted a fresh according to law. R.M. Rweyemamu JUDGE 10/4/2011 9

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA LABOUR DIVISION AT DAR ES SALAAM REVISION NO 305 OF 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA LABOUR DIVISION AT DAR ES SALAAM REVISION NO 305 OF 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA LABOUR DIVISION AT DAR ES SALAAM REVISION NO 305 OF 2010 TANZANIA BUILDING WORKS LTD. APPLICANT VERSUS ALLY MGOMBA & 4 OTHERS RESPONDENTS (Original CMA/DSM/TEM/337/09) 17/09/2012

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA LABOUR DIVISION AT DAR ES SALAAM LABOUR DISPUTE NO 15 OF 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA LABOUR DIVISION AT DAR ES SALAAM LABOUR DISPUTE NO 15 OF 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA LABOUR DIVISION AT DAR ES SALAAM LABOUR DISPUTE NO 15 OF 2010 TANZANIA PLANTATION AND AGRICUTURE WORKERS UNION... COMPLAINANT VERSUS M/S UNITRANS (T) LTD..... RESPONDENT 20/4/2011

More information

(CORAM: NSEKELA, J.A., KILEO, J.A. And BWANA, J.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 26 OF 2008

(CORAM: NSEKELA, J.A., KILEO, J.A. And BWANA, J.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 26 OF 2008 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM (CORAM: NSEKELA, J.A., KILEO, J.A. And BWANA, J.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 26 OF 2008 AGNESS SIMBAMBILI GABBA. APPELLANT VERSUS DAVID SAMSON GABBA RESPONDENT

More information

IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (HELD AT BRAAMFONTEIN) GOLD FIELDS MINING SOUTH AFRICA (PTY) LTD (KLOOF GOLD MINE) Applicant

IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (HELD AT BRAAMFONTEIN) GOLD FIELDS MINING SOUTH AFRICA (PTY) LTD (KLOOF GOLD MINE) Applicant IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (HELD AT BRAAMFONTEIN) CASE NO: JR 2006/08 GOLD FIELDS MINING SOUTH AFRICA (PTY) LTD (KLOOF GOLD MINE) Applicant and COMMISSION FOR CONCILIATION, MEDIATION AND ARBITRATION

More information

THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT

THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT Reportable Case No: JR1944/12 DAVID CHAUKE Applicant and SAFETY AND SECURITY SECTORAL BARGAINING COUNCIL THE MINISTER OF POLICE COMMISSIONER F J

More information

RULING OF THE COURT. The third respondent herein, Elias K. Musiba, used to be an employee

RULING OF THE COURT. The third respondent herein, Elias K. Musiba, used to be an employee IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM (CORAM: RUTAKANGWA, J.A., MBAROUK, J.A., And MASSATI, J.A.) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 97 OF 2010 TANZANIA TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPANY LTD... APPLICANT VERSUS

More information

CASE MANAGEMENT DIRECTIVE EFFECTIVE FROM FIRST TERM OF 2015 ALLOCATION OF TRIAL DATES, CERTIFICATION OF MATTERS

CASE MANAGEMENT DIRECTIVE EFFECTIVE FROM FIRST TERM OF 2015 ALLOCATION OF TRIAL DATES, CERTIFICATION OF MATTERS 1 CASE MANAGEMENT DIRECTIVE EFFECTIVE FROM FIRST TERM OF 2015 (AMENDED UP TO JUNE 2015) GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION ALLOCATION OF TRIAL DATES, CERTIFICATION OF MATTERS INVOLVING EXPERT EVIDENCE AS TRIAL READY,

More information

Rules for Bankruptcy Cases, B.E (1999) Translation

Rules for Bankruptcy Cases, B.E (1999) Translation Rules for Bankruptcy Cases, B.E. 2542 (1999) Translation By virtue of Section 19 of the Act for the Establishment of and Procedure for Bankruptcy Court, B.E. 2542 (1999) the Chief Justice of the Central

More information

CERTIFICATE OF URGENCY

CERTIFICATE OF URGENCY REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI MILIMANI LAW COURTS PETITION NO. OF 2018 ARTICLES 1, 2, 3, 4(2), 10, 12(1)(A), 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27, 41(1), 47,

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM CIVIL REFERENCE NO.12 OF 2004 DAVID MWAKIKUNGA. APPELANT VERSUS

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM CIVIL REFERENCE NO.12 OF 2004 DAVID MWAKIKUNGA. APPELANT VERSUS 1 Civil reference No.12 of 2004 Court of Appeal of Tanzania at Dar es Salaam. Munuo, J.A, Kaji, J.A and Kimaro. David Mwakikunga Vs Mzumbe University (inccessor of the title of IDM Mzumbe) (Reference from

More information

1. This matter came before me as an application in terms of section 165 of the Labour

1. This matter came before me as an application in terms of section 165 of the Labour 166336IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD AT CAPE TOWN CASE NUMBER: C146/97 In the matter between: UNICAB TAXIS (PTY) LTD APPLICANT and ANDRIES KAMMIES RESPONDENT JUDGMENT FABER AJ 1. This matter

More information

LABOUR COURT RULES, 2017 ARRANGEMENT OF RULES PART I PRELIMINARY

LABOUR COURT RULES, 2017 ARRANGEMENT OF RULES PART I PRELIMINARY Statutory Instrument 150 of 2017 LABOUR COURT RULES, 2017 SI 150/2017, 8/2018. ARRANGEMENT OF RULES PART I PRELIMINARY Rule 1. Title. 2. Application. 3. Interpretation. 4. Computation of time and certain

More information

LOCAL RULES of the COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CLARION COUNTY

LOCAL RULES of the COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CLARION COUNTY LOCAL RULES of the COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CLARION COUNTY Supplementing the Rules of Civil Procedure Promulgated by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania Effective July 1, 2005 Hon. James G. Arner President

More information

Date of last Order. Date of Ruling

Date of last Order. Date of Ruling Date of last Order Date of Ruling TIMA HAJI through the services of K. MWITTAWAISSAKA ADVOCATE,has made an application by Chamber Summons under the Civil Procedure Code 1966 seeking from this court, the

More information

GOVERNMENT NOTICE NO. 57 published on 20/4/2001. THE TAX REVENUE APPEALS ACT (No. 15 OF 2000) RULES. (Made under section 33)

GOVERNMENT NOTICE NO. 57 published on 20/4/2001. THE TAX REVENUE APPEALS ACT (No. 15 OF 2000) RULES. (Made under section 33) GOVERNMENT NOTICE NO. 57 published on 20/4/2001 THE TAX REVENUE APPEALS ACT (No. 15 OF 2000) RULES (Made under section 33) THE TAX REVENUE APPEALS BOARD RULES, 2001 PART I PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS Citation

More information

IN THE EAST AFRICAN COURT OF JUSTICE AT ARUSHA FIRST INSTANCE DIVISION. (Coram: Johnston Busingye, PJ, John Mkwawa, J, Isaac Lenaola, J.

IN THE EAST AFRICAN COURT OF JUSTICE AT ARUSHA FIRST INSTANCE DIVISION. (Coram: Johnston Busingye, PJ, John Mkwawa, J, Isaac Lenaola, J. IN THE EAST AFRICAN COURT OF JUSTICE AT ARUSHA FIRST INSTANCE DIVISION (Coram: Johnston Busingye, PJ, John Mkwawa, J, Isaac Lenaola, J.) APPLICATION NO. 1 OF 2013 (ARISING FROM APPLICATION NO. 12 OF 2012)

More information

W.P. (C) No. 8579/2007 Page 1 of 5

W.P. (C) No. 8579/2007 Page 1 of 5 * HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI WP (C) No. 8579/2007 + DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION...Petitioner Through: Mr. Jitender Kumar Advocate. Versus MOHINDER PAL SHARMA...Respondent Through: Mr. Bharat Bhushan

More information

In the Resident Magistrate Court of Shinyanga sitting at Shinyanga, the appellant KAUNGUZA S/O MACHEMBA was charged with four counts.

In the Resident Magistrate Court of Shinyanga sitting at Shinyanga, the appellant KAUNGUZA S/O MACHEMBA was charged with four counts. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT TABORA (CORAM: LUANDA, J.A., ORIYO, J.A., And KAIJAGE, J.A.) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 157B OF 2013 KAUNGUZA S/O MACHEMBA... APPELLANT VERSUS THE REPUBLIC... RESPONDENT

More information

CUSC - SECTION 7 CUSC DISPUTE RESOLUTION CONTENTS

CUSC - SECTION 7 CUSC DISPUTE RESOLUTION CONTENTS CUSC - SECTION 7 CUSC DISPUTE RESOLUTION CONTENTS 7.1 Introduction 7.2 Disputes 7.3 Charging Disputes 7.4 Other Disputes 7.5 Third Party Claims V1.3 1 st August 2014 7.1 INTRODUCTION CUSC - SECTION 7 CUSC

More information

CHAPTER 06:01 ARBITRATION

CHAPTER 06:01 ARBITRATION CHAPTER 06:01 ARBITRATION ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS SECTION PART I Preliminary 1. Short title 2. Interpretation PART II References by Consent out of Court 3. Authority of arbitrators and umpires to be irrevocable

More information

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of decision:1 st December, 2009 M/S ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE. Versus

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of decision:1 st December, 2009 M/S ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE. Versus *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) No.807/2008. % Date of decision:1 st December, 2009 M/S ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD & ANR. Petitioner Through: Mr Prem Kumar and Mr Sharad C.

More information

Trade Disputes Act Ch. 48:02

Trade Disputes Act Ch. 48:02 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS SECTION VOLUME: X TRADE DISPUTES CHAPTER: 48:02 PART I Preliminary 1. Short title 2. Interpretation PART II Establishment of panel and procedure for settlement of trade disputes

More information

IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT

IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT Not reportable Case no. JR 2422/08 In the matter between: GEORGE TOBA Applicant and MOLOPO LOCAL MUNICIPALITY First Respondent SOUTH AFRICAN LOCAL

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM VERSUS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM VERSUS IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM ERNEST MANENO SHIJA VERSUS MAZINGA CORPORATION PLAINTIFF DEFENDANT Date of last Order: 19/09/2006 Date of Ruling: 06/11/2007 Mlay, J. Mzinga Corporation is

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL NO Of 2011 SRI MAHABIR PROSAD CHOUDHARY...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL NO Of 2011 SRI MAHABIR PROSAD CHOUDHARY...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS 1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA REPORTABLE CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8320 Of 2011 SRI MAHABIR PROSAD CHOUDHARY...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS M/S. OCTAVIUS TEA AND INDUSTRIES LTD. AND ANR....RESPONDENT(S)

More information

Petroleum Products and Energy Act 13 of 1990 section 4A(2)(b)

Petroleum Products and Energy Act 13 of 1990 section 4A(2)(b) MADE IN TERMS OF section 4A(2) Regulations for Arbitration Procedures under the Petroleum Products and Energy Act, 1990 Government Notice 93 of 2003 (GG 2970) came into force on date of publication: 29

More information

I have had the benefit of perusing the judgment of my. esteemed learned brother, Hon ble Justice Shri S.B. Sinha,

I have had the benefit of perusing the judgment of my. esteemed learned brother, Hon ble Justice Shri S.B. Sinha, TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI DATED 18 th JULY, 2011 Petition No. 275 (C) of 2009 Reliance Communications Limited.. Petitioner Vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited..... Respondent

More information

.IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA

.IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA .IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an application in terms of Article 121 read with Article 120, Article 78 and Article 154(G)(2) of the Constitution

More information

Labour Court Rules, 2006 ARRANGEMENT OF RULES PART I

Labour Court Rules, 2006 ARRANGEMENT OF RULES PART I DISTRIBUTED BY VERITAS TRUST Tel: [263] [4] 794478 Fax & Messages [263] [4] 793592 E-mail: veritas@mango.zw VERITAS MAKES EVERY EFFORT TO ENSURE THE PROVISION OF RELIABLE INFORMATION, BUT CANNOT TAKE LEGAL

More information

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT Not reportable Case no: JR 1231/12 In the matter between: PAUL REFILOE MAHAMO Applicant And CMC di RAVENNA SOUTH AFRICA

More information

CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA. Food and Allied Workers Union obo J Gaoshubelwe v Pieman s Pantry (Pty) Limited MEDIA SUMMARY

CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA. Food and Allied Workers Union obo J Gaoshubelwe v Pieman s Pantry (Pty) Limited MEDIA SUMMARY CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA Food and Allied Workers Union obo J Gaoshubelwe v Pieman s Pantry (Pty) Limited 1 CCT 236/16 Date of hearing: 3 August 2017 Date of judgment: 20 March 2018 MEDIA SUMMARY

More information

THE PROBATE RULES. (Section 9) PART I PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS (rules 1-3)

THE PROBATE RULES. (Section 9) PART I PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS (rules 1-3) THE PROBATE RULES (Section 9) G.Ns. Nos. 10 of 1963 107 of 1963 369 of 1963 PART I PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS (rules 1-3) 1. Citation These Rules may be cited as the Probate Rules. 2. Interpretation In these

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI. SUBJECT : Bihar Shops and Establishment Act, W.P.(C) No. 5114/2005. Judgment decided on:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI. SUBJECT : Bihar Shops and Establishment Act, W.P.(C) No. 5114/2005. Judgment decided on: IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI SUBJECT : Bihar Shops and Establishment Act, 1956 W.P.(C) No. 5114/2005 Judgment decided on: 14.02.2011 C.D. SINGH Through: Mr Ranjan Mukherjee, Advocate....Petitioner

More information

The Patent Regulation Board and The Trade Mark Regulation Board. Disciplinary Procedure Rules

The Patent Regulation Board and The Trade Mark Regulation Board. Disciplinary Procedure Rules The Patent Regulation Board and The Trade Mark Regulation Board Disciplinary Procedure Rules The Patent Regulation Board of the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys and the Trade Mark Regulation Board

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 298 of 2013 ------- Md. Rizwan Akhtar son of Late Md. Suleman, resident of Ahmad Lane, Azad Basti, Gumla, P.O, P.S. and District: Gumla... Petitioner

More information

THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA THE TAX REVENUE APPEALS ACT CHAPTER 408 REVISED EDITION 2006

THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA THE TAX REVENUE APPEALS ACT CHAPTER 408 REVISED EDITION 2006 THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA THE TAX REVENUE APPEALS ACT CHAPTER 408 REVISED EDITION 2006 This edition of the Tax Revenue Appeals Act, Cap. 408 incorporates all amendments up to 30th November, 2006

More information

BERMUDA LABOUR RELATIONS ACT : 15

BERMUDA LABOUR RELATIONS ACT : 15 QUO FA T A F U E R N T BERMUDA LABOUR RELATIONS ACT 1975 1975 : 15 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 2 3 4 5 5A 5B 5C 5D 5E 5F 5G 5H 5I 5J 5K 5L 5M 5N 5O 5P Interpretation Application of Act PART I PART II ARBITRATION,

More information

20:20 PREVIOUS CHAPTER

20:20 PREVIOUS CHAPTER TITLE 20 TITLE 20 Chapter 20:20 PREVIOUS CHAPTER TITLES REGISTRATION AND DERELICT LANDS ACT Acts 28/1881, 24/1887, 39/1973 (ss. 23 and 52), 29/1981; R.G.N. 64/1895. ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS Section 1. Short

More information

LOCAL RULES SUPERIOR COURT of CALIFORNIA, COUNTY of ORANGE DIVISION 3 CIVIL RULES

LOCAL RULES SUPERIOR COURT of CALIFORNIA, COUNTY of ORANGE DIVISION 3 CIVIL RULES DIVISION 3 CIVIL RULES Rule Effective Chapter 1. Civil Cases over $25,000 300. Renumbered as Rule 359 07/01/09 301. Classification 07/01/09 302. Renumbered as Rule 361 07/01/09 303. All-Purpose Assignment

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL Of TANZANIA AT ZANZIBAR

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL Of TANZANIA AT ZANZIBAR IN THE COURT OF APPEAL Of TANZANIA AT ZANZIBAR 1. SALUM ABASS SALUM } 2. ABDALLA HDA SHAMTE... RESPONDENTS 3. ALl SElF AU :. (Appeal from the Judgment and Decree of the High Court of Zanzibar at Vuga)

More information

LABOUR RELATIONS AMENDMENT BILL, [Words in bold type indicate omissions from existing enactments]

LABOUR RELATIONS AMENDMENT BILL, [Words in bold type indicate omissions from existing enactments] [Words in bold type indicate omissions from existing enactments] Words underlined indicate insertions in existing enactments BE IT ENACTED by the Parliament of the Republic of South Africa, as follows:

More information

UNIFORM ORDER SETTING CASE FOR JURY TRIAL; PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE AND REQUIRING PRETRIAL MATTERS TO BE COMPLETED

UNIFORM ORDER SETTING CASE FOR JURY TRIAL; PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE AND REQUIRING PRETRIAL MATTERS TO BE COMPLETED IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO. CIVIL DIVISION 37 Plaintiff(s), vs. Defendant(s). / UNIFORM ORDER SETTING CASE FOR JURY TRIAL; PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE

More information

S17-65 [Issue 1] STATE CORPORATIONS APPEAL TRIBUNAL RULES, 2001 ARRANGEMENT OF RULES Rule SCHEDULES FIRST SCHEDULE

S17-65 [Issue 1] STATE CORPORATIONS APPEAL TRIBUNAL RULES, 2001 ARRANGEMENT OF RULES Rule SCHEDULES FIRST SCHEDULE STATE CORPORATIONS APPEAL TRIBUNAL RULES, 2001 [Rev. 2012] ARRANGEMENT OF RULES CAP. 446 Rule 1. Citation. 2. Interpretation. 3. Quorum. 4. Form of Appeal. 5. Register of appeals. 6. Filing of Memorandum.

More information

LABOUR RELATIONS ACT NO. 14 OF 2007 SUBSIDIARY LEGISLATION

LABOUR RELATIONS ACT NO. 14 OF 2007 SUBSIDIARY LEGISLATION NO. 14 OF 2007 LABOUR RELATIONS ACT SUBSIDIARY LEGISLATION List of Subsidiary Legislation Page 1. Trade Unions Regulations... L2 67 2. Trade Unions (Appeals) Rules... L2 83 3. Trade Unions (Accounts) Regulations...

More information

OVERVIEW OF THE EAST AFRICAN COURT OF JUSTICE

OVERVIEW OF THE EAST AFRICAN COURT OF JUSTICE OVERVIEW OF THE EAST AFRICAN COURT OF JUSTICE BY JUSTICE HAROLD R. NSEKELA PRESIDENT, EAST AFRICAN COURT OF JUSTICE A Paper for Presentation During the Sensitisation Workshop on the Role of the EACJ in

More information

GUIDE TO ARBITRATION

GUIDE TO ARBITRATION GUIDE TO ARBITRATION Arbitrators and Mediators Institute of New Zealand Inc. Level 3, Hallenstein House, 276-278 Lambton Quay P O Box 1477, Wellington, New Zealand Tel: 64 4 4999 384 Fax: 64 4 4999 387

More information

R U L E S of the Court of Arbitration at the Centre for Mediation and Arbitration of Transport Sp. z o.o. (ltd) in Warsaw

R U L E S of the Court of Arbitration at the Centre for Mediation and Arbitration of Transport Sp. z o.o. (ltd) in Warsaw R U L E S of the Court of Arbitration at the Centre for Mediation and Arbitration of Transport Sp. z o.o. (ltd) in Warsaw Part One General Provisions 1 The Court of Arbitration 1. The Court of Arbitration

More information

EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS TRIBUNAL

EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS TRIBUNAL EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS TRIBUNAL ERT/RN 30/2017 RULING Before: Shameer Janhangeer Sounarain Ramana Rabin Gungoo Renganaden Veeramootoo Vice-President Member Member Member In the matter of: - Mr Manish MEEHEELAUL

More information

Bar and Bench (

Bar and Bench ( IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION O.A. NO. OF 2018 IN CS (OS) 3457/2015 IN THE MATTER OF; ARVIND KEJRIWAL....APPELLANT VERSUS ARUN JAITLEY.. RESPONDENT INDEX

More information

IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (HELD IN JOHANNESBURG)

IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (HELD IN JOHANNESBURG) IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (HELD IN JOHANNESBURG) Case number: JR2343/05 In the matter between: SEEFF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES Applicant And COMMISSIONER N. MBHELE N.O First Respondent COMMISSION

More information

EIGHTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT SEMINOLE COUNTY CIVIL DIVISION K

EIGHTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT SEMINOLE COUNTY CIVIL DIVISION K EIGHTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT SEMINOLE COUNTY CIVIL DIVISION K ADMINISTRATIVE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES GUIDELINES JUDGE DEBRA S. NELSON (Amended September 17, 2018) INDEX Hearings Scheduling...2 Ex Parte...2

More information

CHAPTER 3:04 SUMMARY JURISDICTION (APPEALS) ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS

CHAPTER 3:04 SUMMARY JURISDICTION (APPEALS) ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS Summary Jurisdiction (Appeals) 3 CHAPTER 3:04 SUMMARY JURISDICTION (APPEALS) ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS SECTION 1. Short title. 2. Interpretation. MAKING OF APPEAL 3. (1) Right of appeal. (2) Appeals

More information

PLEASE NOTE Legislative Counsel Office not Table of Public Acts

PLEASE NOTE Legislative Counsel Office not Table of Public Acts c t LABOUR ACT PLEASE NOTE This document, prepared by the Legislative Counsel Office, is an office consolidation of this Act, current to August 20, 2016. It is intended for information and reference purposes

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OFT AN ZAN IA (COMMERCIAL DIVTSfON) AT DAR ES SALAAM

IN THE HIGH COURT OFT AN ZAN IA (COMMERCIAL DIVTSfON) AT DAR ES SALAAM IN THE HIGH COURT OFT AN ZAN IA (COMMERCIAL DIVTSfON) AT DAR ES SALAAM MISC COMMERCIAL CAUSE NO 70 OF 2017 (ARISING FROM COMMERCIAL CASE NO. 127 OF 2016) BETWEEN MAN TRAC T ANZANTA LIMITED --------------------------------------------A

More information

IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG

IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG Not Reportable Case no: J 1512/17 In the matter between: SANDI MAJAVU Applicant and LESEDI LOCAL MUNICIPALITY ISAAC RAMPEDI N.O SPEAKER OF LESEDI LOCAL

More information

THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA (COMMERCIAL DIVISION) CIVIL SUIT NO. 366 OF 2004

THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA (COMMERCIAL DIVISION) CIVIL SUIT NO. 366 OF 2004 THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA (COMMERCIAL DIVISION) CIVIL SUIT NO. 366 OF 2004 COTTON PRODUCTS (U) LTD :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: PLAINTIFF VERSUS 1. MOSES

More information

RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE UNITED NATIONS APPEALS TRIBUNAL

RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE UNITED NATIONS APPEALS TRIBUNAL RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE UNITED NATIONS APPEALS TRIBUNAL (As adopted by the General Assembly in Resolution 64/119 on 16 December 2009 and amended by the General Assembly in Resolution 66/107 on 9 December

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN BRIAN MOORE. And PUBLIC SERVICES CREDIT UNION CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN BRIAN MOORE. And PUBLIC SERVICES CREDIT UNION CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV 2010-03257 BETWEEN BRIAN MOORE Claimant And PUBLIC SERVICES CREDIT UNION CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED Defendant Before the Honourable

More information

PROTOCOL (No 3) ON THE STATUTE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

PROTOCOL (No 3) ON THE STATUTE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION C 83/210 Official Journal of the European Union 30.3.2010 PROTOCOL (No 3) ON THE STATUTE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION THE HIGH CONTRACTING PARTIES, DESIRING to lay down the Statute of

More information

THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT

THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT Not Reportable Case no: JR1679/13 In the matter between: SIZANO ADAM MAHLANGU Applicant and COMMISION FOR CONCILIATION, MEDIATION AND ARBITRATION

More information

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE CHAPTER 75 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE SUBSIDIARY LEGISLATION List of Subsidiary Legislation Page 1. Public Prosecutors Appointed Under Section 85(1)... 205 2. Criminal Procedure (Directions in the Nature

More information

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +CM Nos.7694-95/2010 (for restoration of CM No.266/2010 and for condonation of delay in applying for the same) in W.P.(C) 4165/2000 % Date of decision: 3 rd June,

More information

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA PIMA COUNTY ORDER AMENDING RULE 8 LOCAL RULES OF PRACTICE PIMA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA PIMA COUNTY ORDER AMENDING RULE 8 LOCAL RULES OF PRACTICE PIMA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT FILED IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA PIMA COUNTY FEB 2 6 2009 RACHELLE M. RESNICK CLERK SUPREME COURT BY 09-0014 ORDER AMENDING RULE 8 LOCAL RULES OF PRACTICE PIMA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

More information

PIK-IT UP JOHANNESBURG (PTY) LTD. Third Respondent JUDGMENT. [1] This is an application in terms of which the applicant seeks to have the

PIK-IT UP JOHANNESBURG (PTY) LTD. Third Respondent JUDGMENT. [1] This is an application in terms of which the applicant seeks to have the IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD AT JOHANNESBURG In the matter between: PIK-IT UP JOHANNESBURG (PTY) LTD Reportable Case number JR1834/09 Applicant and SALGBC K MAMBA N.O IMATU obo COOK First Respondent

More information

NOTICE OF SMALL CLAIM

NOTICE OF SMALL CLAIM NOTICE OF SMALL CLAIM PLAINTIFF(S) Name: HENRY CIRCUIT COURT NO. 3 Street: 1215 Race Street City, State, Zip: New Castle, IN 47362 Telephone No: (765) 521-2554 or 529-6401 Email Address: DEFENDANT(S) Name:

More information

VERSUS THE STANDARD CHARTERED BANK OF UGANDA.1 ST RESPONDENT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA...2 ND RESPONDENT

VERSUS THE STANDARD CHARTERED BANK OF UGANDA.1 ST RESPONDENT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA...2 ND RESPONDENT IN THE EAST AFRICAN COURT OF JUSTICE-APPELLATE DIVISION AT ARUSHA TAXATION CAUSE NUMBER 1 OF 2012 (In Appeal No. 2 of 2011) ALCON INTERNATIONAL LIMITED...APPLICANT VERSUS THE STANDARD CHARTERED BANK OF

More information

STATUTE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

STATUTE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION CONSOLIDATED VERSION OF THE STATUTE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION This text contains the consolidated version of Protocol (No 3) on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union,

More information

"collective agreement" means an agreement as to industrial matters;

collective agreement means an agreement as to industrial matters; Page 1 of 36 Short title 1. This Act may be cited as the Industrial Relations Act. Interpretation 2. In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires "award" means an award made by a Court; "collective

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI. W.P. (L) No of 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI. W.P. (L) No of 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI. W.P. (L) No. 4484 of 2008 Birendra Kumar Singh Petitioner -V e r s u s- Secretary, Foundary Forge Co-operative Society Ltd., Dhurwa, Ranchi CORAM: - HON BLE MR.

More information

Chief Manager, R. S. R. T. C., Hanumangarh v Labour Tribunal, Sri Ganganagar and another

Chief Manager, R. S. R. T. C., Hanumangarh v Labour Tribunal, Sri Ganganagar and another Chief Manager, R. S. R. T. C., Hanumangarh v Labour Tribunal, Sri Ganganagar and another Rajasthan High Court JODHPUR BENCH 17 January 2015 S. B. Civil W.P. No. 6253 of 2007 The Order of the Court was

More information

Samuel G. Momanyi v Attorney General & another [2012] eklr REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS)

Samuel G. Momanyi v Attorney General & another [2012] eklr REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS) Petition 341 of 2011 SAMUEL G. MOMANYI..PETITIONER VERSUS THE HON. ATTORNEY GENERAL..... 1ST RESPONDENT SDV TRANSAMI KENYA LTD....2ND

More information

The Intellectual Property Regulation Board (incorporating The Patent Regulation Board and the Trade Mark Regulation Board)

The Intellectual Property Regulation Board (incorporating The Patent Regulation Board and the Trade Mark Regulation Board) The Intellectual Property Regulation Board (incorporating The Patent Regulation Board and the Trade Mark Regulation Board) Final Draft Disciplinary Procedure Rules The Patent Regulation Board of the Chartered

More information

the other Party has otherwise failed to carry out its obligations under this Agreement; or

the other Party has otherwise failed to carry out its obligations under this Agreement; or CHAPTER TWENTY DISPUTE SETTLEMENT ARTICLE 20.1: COOPERATION The Parties shall at all times endeavor to agree on the interpretation and application of this Agreement, and shall make every attempt through

More information

THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT

THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT Not Reportable Case no: JR832/11 In the matter between: SUPT. MM ADAMS Applicant and THE SAFETY AND SECURITY SECTORAL BARGAINING COUNCIL JOYCE TOHLANG

More information

IN THE INDUSTRIAL COURT OF SWAZILAND JUDGEMENT

IN THE INDUSTRIAL COURT OF SWAZILAND JUDGEMENT IN THE INDUSTRIAL COURT OF SWAZILAND JUDGEMENT Case NO. 418/12 In the matter between: SIPHO DLAMINI Applicant And THE TEACHING SERVICE COMMISSION SWAZILAND GOVERNMENT THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL 1 st Respondent

More information

IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG ELIZABETH MATLAKALA BODIBE

IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG ELIZABETH MATLAKALA BODIBE IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG Not Reportable Case no: JR 490/15 In the matter between: ELIZABETH MATLAKALA BODIBE Applicant and PUBLIC SERVICE CO-ORDINATING BARGAINING COUNCIL DANIEL

More information

GOVERNMENT GAZETTE REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA

GOVERNMENT GAZETTE REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA GOVERNMENT GAZETTE OF THE REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA N$15.20 WINDHOEK - 7 November 2014 No. 5608 CONTENTS Page GOVERNMENT NOTICES No. 227 Amendment of Rules of High Court of Namibia: High Court Act, 1990... 1

More information

Charles De Barbier and another v Roland Leduc HCVAP 2008/010

Charles De Barbier and another v Roland Leduc HCVAP 2008/010 Page 1 Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court Reports/ 2008 / St. Kitts and Nevis / Charles De Barbier and another v Roland Leduc - [2008] ECSCJ No. 134 [2008] ECSCJ No. 134 Charles De Barbier and another v Roland

More information

TRADE UNION AND LABOR RELATIONS ADJUSTMENT ACT. Act No. 5310, Mar. 13, 1997 CHAPTER I. General Provisions

TRADE UNION AND LABOR RELATIONS ADJUSTMENT ACT. Act No. 5310, Mar. 13, 1997 CHAPTER I. General Provisions TRADE UNION AND LABOR RELATIONS ADJUSTMENT ACT Act No. 5310, Mar. 13, 1997 Amended by Act No. Act No. Act No. Act No. Act No. Act No. Act No. Act No. 5511, 6456, 7845, 8158, 9041, 9930, 10339, 12630, Feb.

More information

2009 No (L. 20) TRIBUNALS AND INQUIRIES

2009 No (L. 20) TRIBUNALS AND INQUIRIES S T A T U T O R Y I N S T R U M E N T S 2009 No. 1976 (L. 20) TRIBUNALS AND INQUIRIES The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009 Made - - - - 16th July 2009 Laid

More information

Rules for the conduct of proceedings before the CCMA. Act. Published under. GN R1448 in GG of 10 October as amended by

Rules for the conduct of proceedings before the CCMA. Act. Published under. GN R1448 in GG of 10 October as amended by Rules for the conduct of proceedings before the CCMA Act Published under GN R1448 in GG 25515 of 10 October 2003 as amended by GN R1512 in GG 25607 of 17 October 2003 GN R1748 of 2003 in GG 25797 of 5

More information

STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF JACKSON BUSINESS COURT DIVISION. via telephone (check one) /

STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF JACKSON BUSINESS COURT DIVISION. via telephone (check one) / STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF JACKSON BUSINESS COURT DIVISION PLAINTIFF NAME v. DEFENDANT NAME Case No. Hon. Richard N. LaFlamme / PLAINTIFF S COUNSEL NAME, ADDRESS, PHONE AND

More information

ARBITRATION AWARD. .IN REGISTRY - NATIONAL INTERNET EXCHANGE OF INDIA.IN domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy INDRP Rules of Procedure

ARBITRATION AWARD. .IN REGISTRY - NATIONAL INTERNET EXCHANGE OF INDIA.IN domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy INDRP Rules of Procedure ARBITRATION AWARD.IN REGISTRY - NATIONAL INTERNET EXCHANGE OF INDIA.IN domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy INDRP Rules of Procedure IN THE MATTER OF: SANDVIK INTELLETUAL PROPERTY AB S - 811 81 Sandviken,

More information

COURT OF APPEAL RULES 2009

COURT OF APPEAL RULES 2009 COURT OF APPEAL RULES 2009 Court of Appeal Rules 2009 Arrangement of Rules COURT OF APPEAL RULES 2009 Arrangement of Rules Rule PART I - PRELIMINARY 7 1 Citation and commencement... 7 2 Interpretation....

More information

APPENDIX K DISPUTE RESOLUTION

APPENDIX K DISPUTE RESOLUTION APPENDIX K DISPUTE RESOLUTION [The Provisions of this Appendix and the Dispute Resolution procedures set forth herein are all subject to the approval of the Ministry of Justice] 1. DEFINITIONS All terms

More information

THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA JOHANNESBURG. THE PUBLIC SERVANTS ASSOCIATION OF SOUTH AFRICA obo A POTGIETER THE DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY

THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA JOHANNESBURG. THE PUBLIC SERVANTS ASSOCIATION OF SOUTH AFRICA obo A POTGIETER THE DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA JOHANNESBURG Not Reportable Case No: JR2212/12 In the matter between: THE PUBLIC SERVANTS ASSOCIATION OF SOUTH AFRICA obo A POTGIETER Applicant and THE DEPARTMENT OF TRADE

More information

Econet Wireless Ltd v Vee Networks Ltd [2006] APP.L.R. 06/28

Econet Wireless Ltd v Vee Networks Ltd [2006] APP.L.R. 06/28 JUDGMENT : The Hon. Mr Justice Morison : 28 th June 2006 1. On 15 May 2006, Langley J granted a 'without notice' injunction against 21 Respondents in favour of the claimants, whom I shall call Econet.

More information

CHAPTER 9 INVESTMENT. Section A

CHAPTER 9 INVESTMENT. Section A CHAPTER 9 INVESTMENT Section A Article 9.1: Definitions For the purposes of this Chapter: Centre means the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) established by the ICSID Convention;

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 158 OF 2012 IN. CIVIL APPEAL NO.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 158 OF 2012 IN. CIVIL APPEAL NO. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 158 OF 2012 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 868 of 2003 In the matter of:- People for Better Treatment (PBT).Petitioner Vs.

More information

RULING OF THE COURT. The appellant, John s/o Ayoub was charged in the District. Court of Tunduru in Ruvuma Region with two economic offences;

RULING OF THE COURT. The appellant, John s/o Ayoub was charged in the District. Court of Tunduru in Ruvuma Region with two economic offences; IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT IRINGA (CORAM: MBAROUK, J.A., MMILLA,J.A., And MWARIJA,J.A.) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 196 OF 2014 JOHN IKLAND @ AYOUB APPELLANT VERSUS THE REPUBLIC. RESPONDENT (Appeal

More information

Arbitration Law, Updated to March 2015

Arbitration Law, Updated to March 2015 Law, 1968- Updated to March 2015 Chapter One: Interpretation 1. For purposes this law - agreement A written agreement to refer to arbitration a dispute which has arisen between the parties to the agreement

More information

World Bank Administrative Tribunal. Order No Ramnath Venkataraman (No. 2), Applicant

World Bank Administrative Tribunal. Order No Ramnath Venkataraman (No. 2), Applicant World Bank Administrative Tribunal 2015 Order No. 2015-3 Ramnath Venkataraman (No. 2), Applicant v. International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Respondent World Bank Administrative Tribunal

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT J GUNJAL. WRIT PETITION Nos /2010 (GM-RES),

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT J GUNJAL. WRIT PETITION Nos /2010 (GM-RES), 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED: THIS THE 27 th DAY OF JUNE, 2012 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT J GUNJAL WRIT PETITION Nos. 38220-221/2010 (GM-RES), BETWEEN: WRIT PETITION No.

More information

Order Sheet I N THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI. Suit No. B-25 of Present: Mr. Justice Khilji Arif Hussain

Order Sheet I N THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI. Suit No. B-25 of Present: Mr. Justice Khilji Arif Hussain Order Sheet I N THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI. Suit No. B-25 of 2006 Present: Mr. Justice Khilji Arif Hussain Date of hearing : 08.08.2006, 16.08.2006 & 22.08.2006 Plaintiffs : Muhammad Khilji & others

More information

National Patent Board Non-Binding Arbitration Rules TABLE OF CONTENTS

National Patent Board Non-Binding Arbitration Rules TABLE OF CONTENTS National Patent Board Non-Binding Arbitration Rules Rules Amended and Effective June 1, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS Important Notice...3 Introduction...3 Standard Clause...3 Submission Agreement...3 Administrative

More information

CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA. Case CCT 3/03 VOLKSWAGEN OF SOUTH AFRICA (PTY) LTD JUDGMENT

CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA. Case CCT 3/03 VOLKSWAGEN OF SOUTH AFRICA (PTY) LTD JUDGMENT CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA Case CCT 3/03 XINWA and 1335 OTHERS Applicants versus VOLKSWAGEN OF SOUTH AFRICA (PTY) LTD Respondent Decided on : 4 April 2003 JUDGMENT THE COURT: [1] The applicants

More information

and The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration 1 st Respondent JUDGMENT

and The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration 1 st Respondent JUDGMENT IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD AT JOHANNESBURG CASE NUMBER J891/98 In the matter between Cycad Construction (Pty) Ltd Applicant and The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

More information

AUSTIN BAR ASSOCIATION FEE DISPUTE RESOLUTION BY-LAWS

AUSTIN BAR ASSOCIATION FEE DISPUTE RESOLUTION BY-LAWS AUSTIN BAR ASSOCIATION FEE DISPUTE RESOLUTION BY-LAWS 1. MEDIATION AND ARBITRATION OF FEE DISPUTES 1.01 Purpose. Clients of attorneys subject to these Rules and the public in general have a right to be

More information

Arbitration Act, 2055 (1999)

Arbitration Act, 2055 (1999) Arbitration Act, 2055 (1999) Date of authentication and publication: 2 Chaitra 2056 (April 15, 1999) 1. The Act Amending Some Nepal Acts, 2064 2064.5.9 Act No. 1 of the year 2056 (1999) An act made to

More information

IN THE PUBLIC PROCUREMENT APPEALS AUTHORITY AT DAR ES SALAAM CONSOLIDATED APPEAL CASES NO. 42 & 43 OF BETWEEN

IN THE PUBLIC PROCUREMENT APPEALS AUTHORITY AT DAR ES SALAAM CONSOLIDATED APPEAL CASES NO. 42 & 43 OF BETWEEN IN THE PUBLIC PROCUREMENT APPEALS AUTHORITY AT DAR ES SALAAM CONSOLIDATED APPEAL CASES NO. 42 & 43 OF 2014-15. BETWEEN M/S QUANTUM POWER E.A LIMITED. 1 ST APPELLANT M/S KOCH ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION LDC/PROMAN

More information