Hillary Manyika v BHS Logistics

### Preamble
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE
JUDGMENT
NO. LC/H/339/2014
HARARE, 3 & 20 JUNE 2014
CASE NO.
---------




IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE	 JUDGMENT NO. LC/H/339/2014

HARARE, 3 & 20 JUNE 2014		                  CASE NO. LC/ORD/H/87/12

In the matter between:-

HILLARY MANYIKA					Applicant

And

BHS LOGISTICS						Respondent

Before The Honorable F.C. Maxwell, Judge

Applicant			In default

For Respondent		Mr. D. Sigauke (Legal Practitioner)

MAXWELL J:

On 23 May 2012 Applicant filed a chamber application for review of disciplinary hearing proceedings in terms of Rule 16 (1) of this Court’s rules SI 59/2006, as read with Section 97 (1) (d) of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01].  The main complaint was that on 25/4/12 Applicant had appealed against the decision of the disciplinary committee but the appeal was not heard or determined.  Applicant is seeking an order setting aside the disciplinary proceedings, restoration of the status quo and immediate payment of salaries and other benefits.  Applicant also prayed for costs of suit.  On 18 May 2012 Applicant tendered his resignation in writing.  On 31 July 2012 Respondent responded to the application pointing out that a wrong procedure had been followed, the relief sought is incompetent and the application had been overtaken by events as Applicant had tendered his resignation.

On 10 October 2012 this Court issued an order granting the application for review on the basis that there was no response from the Respondent despite service of the application on it being confirmed.  An application seeking rescission of the said order was granted on 21 March 2013.

On the date of the hearing of the matter on the merits the applicant defaulted.  From the submissions for Respondent the order of 21 March 2013 was not known as the Court was urged to set aside the default judgment.  What was before the Court was the application for review as the issue of the default judgment had been dealt with on 21 March 2013.  I am satisfied that Applicant should have sought an order compelling the Respondent to determine the appeal.  The Case of ZIMRA v Mpindiwa SC 85/06 gives directions to that effect.

The application is therefore dismissed with costs.