Richard T. Chinengundu v City of Harare

[2013] ZWLC 266

Analyze with AI

Case Details

Court

Labour Court

Date

22 June 2013

Citation

[2013] ZWLC 266

Judgment No.

LC/H/266/2013

Outcome

unknown

Case Type

Appeal

Bench

Presiding

L. Hove

Full Bench

L. Hove

Areas of Law

Labour LawPrescription

Keywords

prescriptionlabour officertime limitsunfair labour practice

Key Issues

{"issue_text":"Whether the claim by the Appellant had prescribed by the time it was referred to a Labour Officer","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Dispute arose December 1999, referred August 2004"}

This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.

background

Facts of the Case

Background

The appellant was dismissed in December 1999. After unsuccessful attempts at review and ministerial intervention, he referred the dispute to a Labour Officer in August 2004, more than 2 years after the dispute arose. The appeal questions whether the claim had prescribed under section 94(1) of the Labour Act.

Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases

Open in Zalari →

Zalari is Zimbabwe and Southern Africa's leading AI-powered legal research platform, built by DeepCounsel and powered by Nyamaropa Technologies. Search Zimbabwe Supreme Court and High Court case law instantly, get AI-generated answers with full source citations, and access the most comprehensive corpus of Zimbabwean and Southern African jurisprudence available online. Zalari is the go-to legal AI platform for attorneys, advocates, law students, judges, and corporate counsel across Zimbabwe and South Africa — delivering faster research, smarter insights, and a competitive edge in legal practice. Zalari does not provide legal advice. Always consult a qualified legal practitioner for advice specific to your situation. © 2026 DeepCounsel — a legal technology company democratising access to legal knowledge in Africa.