Shah Mutsago v Mbada Diamonds (Private) Limited

Key Issues

• {"issue_text":"Whether the disciplinary and appeals committees were properly constituted","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Appellant initially questioned composition but later conceded it was proper"}
• {"issue_text":"Whether the appeals committee could substitute its own penalty","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Disciplinary committee actually imposed dismissal, not suspension"}
• {"issue_text":"Whether theft was proven on the evidence","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Appellant found with stone, no explanation given, circumstances suggested intent"}
• {"issue_text":"Whether the stone needed to be valued or identified as precious","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Stone was quartzite associated with conglomerate"}
• {"issue_text":"Whether appellant received adequate notice of disciplinary hearing","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Hearing held 2 days after arrest, issue not raised at lower levels"}

Background