Disciplinary proceedingsContractual dispute resolutionBias and malice
legislation
Statutes Cited
Arbitration Act
ai analysis
Case Summary
Key Issues
{"issue_text":"Whether the Disciplinary Authority was unlawfully appointed contrary to the arbitration clause in the employment contract","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Contract clause 29, unilateral appointment of disciplinary authority"}
{"issue_text":"Whether the Disciplinary Committee was improperly composed contrary to Statutory Instrument 15 of 2006","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Appointment of hearing authority and assessor"}
{"issue_text":"Whether there was malice and bias rendering the hearing unfair","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Denial of documents, refusal of postponement, presence of press"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
The applicant, CEO of Zimbabwe Mining Development Corporation, was subjected to disciplinary proceedings after being suspended on 16 misconduct charges. He challenged the proceedings on grounds that the disciplinary authority was improperly appointed contrary to the arbitration clause in his employment contract and that the proceedings were biased.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases