Skip to document content Skip to main menu Skip to search

High Court Labour Division

High Court Labour Division is responsible for hearing and determining employment disputes. It was first inaugurated and launched in June 2007 under the Employment and Labour Relations Act.

3 judgments
Advanced search
All years
Filters
  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
3 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
December 2015
Institute of Social Work vs Elia Kasalile & Others (Consolidated Revision No. 187 of 2013) [2015] TZHCLD 2 (4 December 2015)
Strike was a dispute of right making dismissal substantively fair, but defective disciplinary notice reduced employees' compensation.
* Labour law – strike — distinction between dispute of right and dispute of interest; lawfulness of strike under s.80. * Procedural fairness — requirement to notify/serve employees of disciplinary hearings; consequence of defective service. * Representative claims at CMA — use of Form No.1 to file on behalf of multiple employees. * Remedy for substantively justified but procedurally unfair dismissal — reduction of compensation, setting aside severance, no reinstatement.
 4 December 2015
October 2015
Mufindi Paper Mills Ltd vs Prosper John Eugene & Others (Labour Dispute No. 10 of 2012) [2015] TZHCLD 1 (2 October 2015)
Court allowed use of police-held photocopied documents at hearing despite Rule 14 concerns, upholding social-justice considerations.
Labour procedure – disclosure at pre-trial (Rule 14) – documents in police custody – discretionary leave to use photocopies – balancing procedural rules with social justice and objectives of Employment and Labour Relations Act.
 2 October 2015
August 2015
Ashery S/o James vs Monica Zablon (Civil Revision No. 8 of 2014) [2015] TZHCLD 3 (21 August 2015)
Application struck out for wrong citation of enabling law; matters from Primary Courts governed by Cap.11 and G.N.312/1964.
Primary Courts — Appeals and revisions — Applicability of Magistrates' Courts Act (Cap. 11) and G.N. No. 312 of 1964 to matters originating in Primary Courts — Wrong or non‑citation of enabling law renders application incompetent — Strike out vs dismissal — Costs where court raises competency suo motu.
 21 August 2015