Chitungwiza Municipality v Faith Mupangani (N.O.) and Alice Dzvuke and 103 Others

### Preamble
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE
JUDGMENT NO LC/H/63/2021
HARARE, 11 MAY 2021
4 JUNE 2021
CASE NO LC/H/APP/387/19
LC/H/LRA/376/18
---------


IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE	   JUDGMENT NO LC/H/63/2021

HARARE, 11 MAY  2021&				   CASE NO LC/H/APP/387/19

4 JUNE 2021				                   	   LC/H/LRA/376/18

In the matter between:-

CHITUNGWIZA MUNICIPALITY		 APPLICANT

AND

FAITH MUPANGANI (N.O.)			 RESPONDENT

AND

ALICE DZVUKE AND 103 OTHERS		 2nd -104th RESPONDENT

Before the Honourable Kudya J

For the Applicant				S. Baira (Legal Practitioner)

For the 1st Respondent			No appearance despite service

For the 2   TO 104th    Respondent		Ms L. Shambamuto (Legal Practitioner)

KUDYA, J:

This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court.  The application is at the instance of the applicant Municipality in a matter where respondent employees successfully sought reinstatement relief from a labour officer in a labour dispute pitting them and the Municipality.  After deliberations were made on the Labour dispute the labour officer ruled that the employees had lost their jobs irregularly. In the result he reinstated them without loss of salary and benefits. In the alternate he ordered the Municipality to pay the employees damages in lieu of reinstatement.

The reinstatement ruling was confirmed by the labour court.  Such confirmation did not go down well with the Municipality which wants to take the matter up on appeal to the Supreme Court. It is in the light of such intent that the Municipality has brought the instant application for leave to leave.

The Municipality contends that it has a plausible case to take up on appeal. In its view the labour officer and the labour court issued a declaration contrary to law.  It is also of the view that the loss of jobs on notice by the employees was regular so they need not have been reinstated. In the ultimate it argues that it had paid the employees retrenchment packages where acceptance by the same meant that they had waived their right to challenge the loss of jobs on notice.

On the other hand the employees contend that all the arguments advanced by the Municipality are without merit. In their view the appeal sought to be mounted is an exercise in futility not warranting grant of the leave relief sought by the employer.

It is settled law that the main tenets for the success of leave to appeal applications is whether there is a point of law made by the applicant and whether there are prospects of success on appeal. See Dombodzvuku  v CMED  SC – 31-12.

Applying the law set out in the quoted case to the facts of the case at stake it is clear that from a reading of the labour court decision that all the 3 issues which the Municipality says show its prospects these were discussed at length in labour court judgment. There is nothing more which this court views as deserving of extra comment other than the comments which are apparent in the judgment referred to. There is nothing else that has been set out by the Municipality to persuade this court to conclude that the Supreme Court is likely to arrive at a different decision from that arrived at by the labour court.  To that extent the application for leave fails the test for such applications. Further to that there is no different point of law See Sable Chemicals v Easterbrooke SC 18/10 which the Supreme court is intended to deliberate. In the ultimate the court is satisfied that the application for leave to appeal is without merit. It should accordingly fail.

IT IS ORDERED THAT

Application for leave to appeal to the Supreme court being without merit in its entirety.  It be and is hereby dismissed with costs.

Matsikidze Attorneys at Law, Applicant’s Legal Practitioner

Shambamuto Law Chambers, Respondent’s Legal Practitioner