{"issue_text":"Whether the arbitrator used the correct salary scale for quantification","issue_type":"fact","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Makunde's affidavit, Manpower budgets, salary scale of USD 2,283.00"}
{"issue_text":"Whether the award used the correct time frame extending beyond contract expiry","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Fixed-term contract expired 30 April 2012, award calculated to April 2023"}
{"issue_text":"Whether the employee's claims converted to Zimbabwe currency by operation of law","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Finance Act No 02/19, claims not assessed before effective date"}
{"issue_text":"Whether award wrongly included allowances over and above basic salary","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Allowances paid during contract, no collective bargaining agreement"}
{"issue_text":"Whether award properly ordered payment by way of payment plan","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Substantial award amount, local authority financial difficulties"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
The appellant employer appealed against an arbitral award that ordered payment of US$1,215,328.67 in outstanding salaries and benefits to the respondent employee. The dispute involved the correct salary scale to use for quantification, the appropriate time frame for calculation, currency conversion issues, and whether allowances and payment plans were properly considered.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases