Abias Muchingami v Delta Beverages

### Preamble
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE
JUDGMENT
LC/H/186/2014
HARARE, 31 OCTOBER 2013
CASE NO. LC/H/186/2014
---------




IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE	 JUDGMENT NO. LC/H/186/2014

HARARE, 31 OCTOBER 2013			                 CASE NO. LC/H/76/11 & 28 MARCH 2014

In the matter between:-

ABIAS MUCHINGAMI					Appellant

And

DELTA BEVERAGES					Respondent

Before Honourable B.S. Chidziva, Judge

For Appellant		Mr.  A. Maponga  (Legal Practitioner)

For Respondent		Mr. G. Chingoma (Legal Practitioner)

CHIDZIVA J:

The brief background of this appeal is that Appellant was employed as a Driver/Salesman by the Respondent.  It is alleged that on the 9th of July 2010 he delivered 28 cases of beer at Sahara Bottle Store in Budiriro Harare.  It is also alleged that the appellant told the Respondent that he had sold the beer to Sahara on credit when he had actually been paid US$361,00 by Mr. Mutepfa.  The Appellant was charged with theft and was dismissed from employment with effect from the 24th of December 2010.

The Appellant has thus appealed against the decision of the Respondent to dismiss him.  The grounds of appeal are as follows:-

“1.	During the World Cup period there was an instruction given by the Manager that drivers will be instructed in their duties by the Sales Representatives, hence Mr. Abias Muchingami has no case to answer.  All the drivers were addressed by the Manager to that effect.

Mr. A. Machingami did not record Sahara Bottle Store because the customer had not paid cash and he could not record on the credit side either because he had no authority to give credits but the Sales Representative who instructed Mr. Muchingami to leave beer at Sahara Bottle Store.

The Sales Representative is denying giving the instruction maybe because he connives with the customers and the route settlement clerk.

Why it took three (3) months before the Sales Representative raise the issue instead of fourty eight (48) hours as required by the policy.”

The appellant therefore prayed that the decision to dismiss him be reversed and be substituted with an appropriate order.

The Respondent in response told the court that;

Mr. Marange had no power to authorize a credit sale and he did not authorize a credited sale for Sahara Bottle Store.

The customer indicated that he paid cash.

The appellant in his grounds of appeal is suggesting that he was unfairly dismissed because there was no evidence to convict him.  Tatenda Marange the Sales Representative gave evidence to the effect that he was fairly new at the company and that he never authorized the appellant to sell beer to Sahara Bottle Store on credit.  He joined Delta on the 14th of July 2010 and by 19 July he could not have had the authority to approve credit Sales.  He could have been on probation that time.  Mr. Mutepfa the proprietor of Sahara Bottle Store also denied buying beer on credit.  He stated that he paid cash amounting to US$361,00  and he was given a cash invoice.  The appellant never recorded whether the customer had bought beer on credit or not as required by the company procedures

Mr. Marange and Mr. Mutepfa had not yet known each other.  There was therefore no way they could have connived to falsely implicate the appellant.

In view of the foregoing it is very clear that the appellant had failed to substantiate his claims.  The appeal lacks merit.  Accordingly the appeal be and is hereby dismissed.

United Food and Allied Workers Union, Appellant’s legal practitioners

Dube, Manikai & Hwacha, Respondent’s Legal Practitioners