Johannes Dube v Trojan Nickel Mine Pvt Ltd

### Preamble
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE
JUDGMENT NO LC/H/57/2022
HARARE, 16 FEBRUARY 2022 &
11 MARCH 2022
CASE NO LC/H/389/21
---------


IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE	   JUDGMENT NO LC/H/57/2022

HARARE, 16 FEBRUARY 2022 &		  	 CASE NO LC/H/389/21

11 MARCH  2022

In the matter between:-

JOHANNES DUBE					    APPLICANT

And

TROJAN NICKEL MINE PVT LTD		   RESPONDENT

Before the Honourable Kudya J

For the Applicant			Tsaurayi  (Unionist)

For the Respondent			Musengwa  (Legal Practitioner )

KUDYA, J:

This judgment only addresses the point in limine which was raised by the respondent employer.  The point was to the effect that there is no respondent in the matter.  This is so since applicant employee cited the respondent irregularly by mixing its name together with that of the holding company in the same pleadings.

The applicant concedes the mis citation but says such error was occasioned by the respondent which used to interchange the way it referred to itself. He therefore prayed that the mis citation be classified as a technicality which should not detain the court but let the matter proceed to the merits instead.

It is settled law that a nullity begets a nullity See McFay vs United Africa Company 1961 (3) AllER 1169.  In the case at hand the mis citation goes to the root of the pleadings and can not be styled a technicality.  In any event even if it were to be classified as such it should be put right.  See Nyahuma v Barclays Bank SC-86-04.  In the ultimate the point being well placed should succeed.

As regards costs no good case has been made out for punitive costs so it is the court’s view that an order on the ordinary scale is just.

IT IS ORDERED THAT

Point in limine on citation being well placed it be and hereby succeeds.  Application for con donation is struck off the roll with costs on the ordinary scale.

Chimuka Mafunga Commercial Attorneys,	Respondent’s Legal Practitioners