Arbitration award appealMisconductRefusal to follow lawful instructions
legislation
Statutes Cited
N
o
n
e
–
n
o
s
t
a
t
u
t
o
r
y
p
r
o
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
w
e
r
e
q
u
o
t
e
d
,
i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
e
d
o
r
a
p
p
l
i
e
d
.
ai analysis
Case Summary
Key Issues
{"issue_text":"Whether the instruction issued to respondent to reveal names of people allegedly involved in criminal activities was lawful","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Respondent's refusal to name perpetrators; company's instruction to disclose names"}
{"issue_text":"Whether respondent's refusal to disclose names constituted willful disobedience to lawful instructions","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Respondent's report mentioned people by titles and names; concluding paragraph refusal"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
The appellant employer dismissed the respondent employee for allegedly refusing to disclose names of persons engaged in criminal activities at the Masvingo branch despite instructions to do so. The arbitrator ordered reinstatement, finding the misconduct was not proved. The employer appealed to the Labour Court.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases