Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Tanzania decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Court found that the respondent failed to follow proper procedure by initiating disciplinary proceedings prematurely, did not conduct a proper investigation, and failed to adduce evidence at the ex parte disciplinary hearing, rendering the termination both substantively and procedurally unfair.
Source excerpt
The dismissal was for valid reasons but the procedure was breached as the disciplinary hearing was chaired by an unqualified person, violating fair hearing requirements. Compensation is reduced to six months' salary.
Source excerpt
The termination was procedurally unfair as the respondent failed to follow proper procedures, including providing adequate notice and connecting the criminal conviction to loss caused to the employer. Compensation is awarded for procedural unfairness.
Source excerpt
The court found that the respondent complied with all procedural requirements for termination, including proper notification, opportunity to respond, and fair composition of the disciplinary committee. The applicant failed to prove any procedural irregularity that prejudiced him. Termination was both substantively and procedurally fair, and the application was dismissed for lack of merit.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed a labour revision application and upheld a CMA award finding unfair termination for lack of valid reason and fair procedure.
The respondent's termination was substantively fair due to admitted gross misconduct, but procedurally unfair as she was not afforded a right to be heard before the disciplinary hearing due to circumstances beyond her control. The arbitrator was justified in granting condonation for late filing. Compensation is not warranted where gross misconduct is admitted.
Source excerpt
The High Court upheld a CMA award in a labour revision, finding the termination substantively justified for absenteeism, but noting procedural non-compliance under the Code of Good Practice.
Termination was not procedurally fair as the respondent was not properly heard in the second disciplinary hearing, violating principles of natural justice and Rule 13 of the Code.
Source excerpt
The High Court revised a CMA award, found the termination procedurally fair but substantively unsupported, and replaced reinstatement with compensation and terminal benefits.
The applicants failed to prove that their resignation was not voluntary or that the respondent created intolerable working conditions amounting to constructive termination. The evidence did not support claims of being denied workplace access or being forced to sign incriminating declarations. The applicants were suspended on full pay pending disciplinary proceedings, and the burden of proof for constructive termination was not met.
Source excerpt
Explore more
