CASES DETERMINED BY THE COURT
Alufandika v Encor Products Limited Civil Cause No. 3828 of 2002
Originating Summons based
on Sections 31 of the Constitution and 35 of the Employment Act the plaintiff
seeks a number of declarations and Orders consequent on the defendant’s
termination of his employment with it.
Banda (D) v First Merchant Bank Matter No.
19 of 2001
The Applicant in his Statement of Claim has raised a trade dispute of unlawful dismissal, defamation of character and he is also claiming for cost of this action.
Banda (K) v Bible Society of Malawi Matter No. 10 of
The applicant instituted these proceedings through IRC FORM 1. He contends that the respondents who were his employers unlawfully dismissed him. The issue of employment was not in contention as it was agreed that the applicant was employed on 1 January 1997 as Faith Comes By Hearing (FCBH) Promoter. The applicant was in the service of the respondents discharging his duties till December 1999 when his services were terminated by letter of that date.
Banda (LPK) v Dwangwa Cane Growers Co. Matter
No. 18 of 2001
In his applicants’ statement of claim, he alleges that the respondent unfairly terminated his employment. The applicant is therefore seeking the relief of compensation.
Banda (N) v Admarc Matter No. 111 of 2000
The applicant has brought this matter against the Respondent alleging that the Respondent has terminated his employment without furnishing him with details of the audit report. The Applicant would therefore like this court to order for his re-instatement or payment of all his dues.
Banda (R) and Another v Blantyre Sports Club Matter No. 197 of 2001
The applicants were retired on 31st May 2001 after reaching retirement age. They allege that they were not paid all their benefits at retirement. They are asking this court to order the respondent to pay them the balance from both severance allowance and pension benefits.
Banda (W S) v Cusmarcos Invest. Ltd Matter No. 81 of 2001
In the Applicant’s statement of claim, the Applicant seeks a relief that he should be paid adequate long service benefits for the 15 years that he had worked for the Respondents. The Applicant disclosed in his statement of claim that he was paid K5,000 only which he takes to be far much inadequate.
Beseni v Nkhoma Synod Matter No. 42 of 2001
The trade dispute between the two
parties is that of unfair termination of employment. The applicant is seeking
the relief of re-instatement.
Bvumbwe v Banja La Mtsogolo Matter No. 219 of 2002
This is a motion for urgent interim relief filed by the applicant under Rule 16 of the Industrial Relations Court (Procedure) Rules, 1999 to recover a balance of pension payment from the respondents. The applicant stated that upon termination of his services he was not paid all his pension dues and he applied to this court to enforce payment of the said balance.
Chandilira v Sister Angela Matter No. 33 of 2001
Trade dispute of withholding payment of K17,000.00. The Respondent denied the allegation saying that as a result of the Applicant’s conduct, she had paid the balance of K17,000.00 to the people who had finished the job.
Chilala & Others v Petrolium Services(Mw) Ltd
Matter No. 158 of 2000
These applicants have brought this case against Petroleum Services (Malawi) Limited who is the respondent. In their statement of claim, the applicants have disclosed that they were underpaid their terminal benefits. The relief they are seeking from this Court is that they should be paid all their terminal benefits for all the years they had worked for the respondent.
Chinkondenji v Malawi Stock Exchange Matter
No. 40 of 2002
The applicant brought this matter pursuant to Rule 25 (1) (M) (i) of the Industrial Relations Court) (Procedure Rules). In her affidavit in support of this application which application is through a notice of motion, she is seeking an urgent interim relief to be reinstated to the position of Administrative Assistant/Secretary pending determination of substantive issues which she has itemized on her Applicant’s Statement of Claim.
Chisale v MTL Matter No. 328 of 2002
The applicant was employed by the respondent as driver in 1986. His employment service was terminated on 25 July 2002. The reasons for termination were that the respondent had lost trust in the applicant. The reason for the loss of trust was because the applicant had obtained five liters more fuel than what was allocated to him through a fuel coupon.
Chiume v S S Rent A Car Ltd Matter no. 149 of 2000
The applicant, Timothy Chiba Chiume, was employed by the respondent, SS Rent a Car Limited, on 18th August 1997 as an Accountant. On 10th July 2000, he was served with a letter of redundancy from the respondent. As redundancy package he received K12,735.22 comprising pay for 7 days worked in July, one month’s pay notice, refund of pension and interest on the same and unclaimed leave days. The applicant alleges that his dismissal was unlawful as proper procedure was not followed to declare him redundant. He also claims allowances and commissions to which he was entitled while in the employment of the respondent.
CIAWU v Import and Export Ltd Matter No. 304 of 2002
i) Being wrongly commenced contrary to sections 222 and 219 of the Companies Act;
ii) Being an abuse of court process
iii) For an order to strike out the applicant for being wrongly joined in the proceedings; and
iv) For costs of this application to be provided for contrary to section 227 of the Companies Act
Itaye v Malawi Distilleries Matter No. 25 of 2001
The applicant was employed as Group Sales Manager by the respondent on 2 January 1997. On 19 December 2000 his contract of employment was terminated for three reasons: offering credit without authority; quoting wrong prices to clients; and failing to meet a deadline. Upon termination the applicant was paid and received all his terminal benefits except issues and his entitlement to use of company car.
Jumbo v Banja La Mtsogolo Matter No. 222 of 2001
The Applicant claims that she was dismissed as a result of being pregnant. The Respondent denied the allegations made. They replied in their Respondent’s Statement that they did not terminate the services of the Applicant due to pregnancy; but that the Applicant was a temporary employee on month to month basis, and that her position was publicly advertised and that the Respondent employed the most suitable candidate.
Kachingwe v Group Commodity Brokers Matter No. 117 of 2000
The applicant was employed by the respondent on 1 February 1999 as an Accountant. His services were terminated on 25 February 2000 for what the respondent termed restructuring of the organization. The respondent admitted that the contract of employment of the applicant was terminated because the company was going through restructuring. The Managing Director Mr. Sing decided that the position of Accountant was no longer required. However after his death, new management felt that there was still need for an Accountant at the company and they employed one.
Kachingwe v Shire Bus Lines Matter No. 18 of 2000
The matter came for determination of the manner of termination of applicant’s employment contract with the respondent. The applicant was employed as a messenger in April, 1989. His employment was terminated on 13th August, 1999 while he was serving as fuel attendant for the respondent. The reasons for termination were failure to explain a shortage of 129 litres of fuel on a fuel pump, which he was attending and deception.
Kachule v Admarc Matter No. 10 of 2001
The Applicant brought this matter against the Respondents on a trade dispute of unfair termination of employment. He says that his services were terminated without any reasons being given. He thus applies to the Court for an order that he should be given his gratuity. The Respondents have denied the allegations made. They replied that the Applicant’s services were terminated because the Applicant performed his duties negligently and inefficiently or in the alternative, that the Applicant was involved in fraudulent malpractice causing loss to the Corporation.
Kamono v Cusmarcos Invest. Ltd Matter No. 50 of 2001
In his statement of claim, the applicant claims for long service benefits from the year 1976-98. The Respondents filed in a defence. Their defence is to the effect that the Applicant is not entitled to any long service benefits.
Kapolo v Securico Malawi Ltd Matter No. 152 of 2001
The applicant Mathews Kapolo brought this action claiming balance of salary for January 2001, salary for February 2001, one month notice pay and severance allowance from the respondent. He was employed on 15th December, 2000 and his employment was terminated on 13th February, 2001. The respondent did not appear to respond to the allegations despite proof of service of notices of hearing issued by this court on a number of occasions. However they filed IRC Form 2 in which they disputed the claims
Kapyola & Others v Lonrho Motors Mw Ltd
Matter No. 57 of 2001
The Applicants have brought trade disputes which can be summarized as follows:-
(a) Dispute on pension benefits
(b) Dispute on terminal benefits
(c) Dispute on Actuaries after the Lilongwe office was sold.
The Applicants therefore pray to this Court for the following relief:-
(i) 10 percent company contribution on pension fund
(ii) Share of Actuaries after Halls was sold Lilongwe branch only.
(iii) Three months notice instead of one-month notice given to them.
Katawa v Warpack (Pvt) Ltd Matter No. 284 of 2002
The applicant Watson Katawa was employed as sales and merchandise officer by the respondent, Warpack (Private) Limited, on 7 January 2002. He was put on a six- months probation. His services were terminated before the end of probation period on 1ST July 2002.
Katsabola v Postmaster General Matter 33 of 2001
The applicant claims that the respondent is withholding his wages. He contends that the respondent is withholding his wages which arise as a difference between government salary and corporation salary. He would therefore Love to see this court order that the respondent do pay him that difference which is withheld.
Kawala v M.C.T.U Matter No. of 2001
This matter was brought by the respondents at this stage. They are applying to set aside a default judgment entered against them having obtained a stay of execution of the resulting order for payment of compensation. There was real confusion at the beginning as Counsel for the Respondent, who was appearing for the first time, seemed not to have been briefed properly on the processes that this matter has undergone. In a nutshell, the processes were that first a default judgment was entered; then assessment of compensation followed in the absence of the respondent but before the date of set down of assessment of compensation approached the respondent had written the Court requesting an adjournment.
Kumwenda v Le Meridian Ku Chawe Matter No. 5 of 2003
Kumwenda v Mkandawire Matter No. 102 of 2001
The Applicant was dismissed by the Respondent after having worked only for 6 months. The Applicant said that the dismissal itself was unfair and that by the time he was dismissed, the Respondent owed him money on school fees, water, electricity, forfeited leave grant at Bambino and one month notice pay.
Luhanga v Gestetner Ltd Matter No. 14 of 2000
The applicant has sued the respondent alleging that the respondent wrongfully and unlawfully dismissed her. In her applicants’ statement, she is asking this Court to reinstate her or to be awarded damages.
Madise (S) v ESCOM Matter No. 293 of 2002
Ex parte application for an urgent interim relief made under Rule 25 (1) m (i) of the Industrial Relations Court (Procedure) Rules. The applicant is seeking an order that he be reinstated or that his privileges as an employee of respondent be restored to him.
v Auction Holding
Ltd Matter No. 25 of 2001
The Applicant was praying for a relief that he should be given his severance allowance for all the 13 years that he had worked for the Respondent.
Makoni v Fersons Ltd Matter No. 11 of 2001
The Applicant claims for compensation for injuries which he sustained whilst in the employment with the Respondent.
Manduwa v MACOHA Matter No. 191 of 2001
The respondent is not disputing owing the applicant salary for nine months from April, 1999 to December, 1999. There is also no dispute on leave grant for 199. Pension contributions were not discussed but if the applicant was on a contributory pension scheme she must be entitled to her contribution.
Mkwezalamba v Malawi Posts Corporation Matter No.
154 of 2001
The Applicant has disclosed an alleged trade dispute of unjustified retrenchment. The Applicant at first applied for the relief of compensation up to his normal retirement viz salary, pension, severance allowance and other monetary benefits contained in the Malawi Posts and Telecommunications Corporation (MPTC) Conditions of Service and collective agreements. At a later stage however the Applicant applied to amend the relief to be that of reinstatement; an application which the Respondents vehemently objected.
MTL v MPT Workers Union Civil Cause No. 2721of
The Union moves this Court to decide that Malawi Telecommunications Limited’s action is irregular because Malawi Telecommunications Limited, the employer, should, under sections 54 and 64 of the Labour Relation Act, have commenced the action in the Industrial Relation Court.
Mulewa & Others v CEAR Ltd Matter No. 82 of 2000
The applicants in their Statement of Claim allege a trade dispute of withholding transport allowances by the respondent. They therefore pray that this court should order that they be paid transport allowance.
Mungoni v DEMATT Civil Cause No. 686 of 2001
By Originating Summons dated the 15th day of March, 2001 the plaintiff raised a number of questions for this court to determine. Inter alia, the plaintiff seeks severance pay for termination of employment and a finding that the said termination was wrongful or unlawful, as well as a determination that as such the plaintiff is entitled to compensation.
Mwale v Muchina Construction Co. Matter No. 80 of
The Applicant would like the Respondent to pay to her severance allowance for her late husband who had worked for the Respondent from 1988 to 2001 before he sadly met his death. Thus she is claiming for severance allowance for a period of 14 years.
Ndaule v Admarc Matter No. 109 of 2000
The applicant says that he was dismissed on allegations that he had a shortage of K11,000 which statement the respondent has not substantiated. He is therefore praying this Court to order for his reinstatement or that he should be paid all his dues.
Ngoma v Dimon(Mw) Ltd Matter No. 117 of 2001
The Applicant claims that the Respondent unfairly terminated his employment. He is thus seeking the relief of re-instatement.
Ltd Matter No. 134 of 2000
This matter commenced through the applicant’s Statement of Claim which was issued by this Court on the 24th of August 2000. In that statement, the applicant disclosed that the respondent are holding his retirement benefits. He thus prayed to this Court that he should be paid the said retirement benefits. There being no response to the applicant’s statement of claim, a default judgment was entered by the Court.
Pieterse v Stancom Tobacco Co.(Mw) Ltd Matter No. 11 of 2001
Taking into consideration the importance of the respondent’s application on jurisdiction, this court granted them leave to address this court on the issue before deciding on their earlier application for an adjournment.
Sheha v Malawi Revenue Authority Matter No. 113 of
The applicant commenced this action seeking redress for unfair termination of her services. She was employed by the respondent as Assistant Officer, Human Resource, Grade MRA 9, on 14th February 2000. She was put on probation for twelve months from February 14, 2000. Her services were terminated on 12th February 2001. The reason for termination was that her services were no longer required at the respondent’s Authority.
Soko v Chibuku Products Ltd Matter No. 13 of 2002
The applicant commenced the action claiming One
Hundred Fifty-Five Thousand Two Hundred, Ninety Eight Kwacha and thirty tambala
(K155, 298.30) comprising money earned in excess hours worked for the
respondents during a period from November 1998 to December 1999.
He informed court that he commenced employment with the respondents on 2nd
February 1995 as Sales Representative. His services were terminated
on 29th February 2000. At the time of termination of services he had
risen through the ranks to position of Distribution Manager, earning a basic
salary of K6, 593.00 from K1, 240 when he was first employed.
Tchete v Safeguard Services Matter No. 6 of 2000
The Applicant has raised a trade dispute of dismissal. He is accordingly praying to this Court that he be awarded money for the outstanding 4 years service from 1985-89, 5 days unpaid annual leave and reference letter from 1985 to 1989.
Tengani v PG Industries(Mw) Ltd Matter No. 148 of
This is a case under the Workers’ Compensation Act. The facts are that the applicant was employed by P.G. Industries Limited in 1969 in the mirror making section. In 1973 he was involved in an accident in the course of his employment. He was taken to hospital where he was treated. The degree of permanent incapacity was assessed at 20%.
1975, the applicant was paid full compensation for the injury. The respondents
submitted and tendered in this court a payment voucher in the sum of Malawi
Kwacha 374.40, paid on 30 August 1975( exhibit RP2).
years later in 1994, the applicant was sent back to the hospital for
examination. At this second visit to the hospital, he was re-examined and his
condition was discovered to have worsened. His degree of permanent
incapacity was assessed at 70%.
went back to P.G. Industries where he submitted his medical report. The employer
was not satisfied with the results. Especially, since the applicant had had an
earlier examination in 1975 which put his degree of incapacity at 20%.
Thukuwa v Blue Bird Motel Ltd Matter No. 28 of 1999
The alleged trade dispute is that of unlawful dismissal. In his Statement of Claim, the applicant says that on the 16th of July 1999 he asked for permission from his boss Mrs. Khondowe to go and attend a funeral at Thekerani. He also got an advance of K400-00 for transport. He came back to report for duties on the 20th of July 1999. To his surprise, he was fired without any reasons being given. The respondent the following day paid him K240-00 as wages for that month which he declined to get because the money was less than his monthly salary which at that time was K1,700-00 including house allowance and service charge. He also said that he had not received service charge for the months of April, May and July. The applicant further stated that he lodged a complaint before the Labour Office (South). In the company of the Labour Office, they went to the respondent where they met the Director Mrs. Khondowe. But he was told that she did not care about him. Later on he referred the matter to Malawi CARER a Non-Governmental Organization dealing with issues of Human Rights. He was advised to go back to the Labour Office. He went back to the Labour Office who finally advised him to take the matter to the Industrial Relations Court.
Trade Union Members v N.S.C.M Milling Division Matter
No. 8 of 1999
In their statement of claim, the applicants who were all members of the Hotels, Food and Catering Workers Union (HFCWU) allege that after protesting dismissal of their trade Union leader, they were dismissed. They challenge the dismissal as being unfair and unlawful and they all pray to this Court that they be re-instated to their respective positions with the respondent.
Wandale v Admarc Matter No. 98 of 2001
The Applicant has brought this matter against the Respondent on a trade dispute of withholding overtime dues.
Zamaere v SUCOMA Ltd Matter No. 157 of 2001
This matter has been brought before this Court by Counsel for the applicant in order for the Court to determine that summary judgment be entered in favour of the applicant for the sum of K1,849,124:10 being severance allowance payable by the Respondent to the applicant pursuant to Section 35 (1) and (7) of the Employment Act, 1999, inclusive of 15% solicitors statutory collection fees pursuant to Table 6 of the Legal Practitioners (Scale and Minimum Charges) (Amendment) Rules, 1999. The application is supported by an affidavit deponed by Mr. Joster Mwazani Chisale of Counsel for the applicant. By the Applicant’s Statement of Claim dated the 18th of October, 2001, the Applicant’s Claim against the defendant is for payment of severance allowance in the sum of K1,849,124:10 inclusive of solicitor 15% collection charges pursuant to Table 6 of the Legal Practitioners (Scale and Minimum Charges) (Amendment) Rules, 1999 and costs of this suit.
Zolowere v Total (Malawi) Ltd Matter No.193 of 2002
averred that her services were unfairly terminated because she did not actually
misappropriate the funds. It was one of staff under her supervision that had
misappropriated the money and had promised to repay the company.