Octavia Moyo and Another v Bev King Flowers

### Preamble
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE
JUDGMENT NO. LC/H/701/2013
HARARE, 3 AND 6 DECEMBER 2013
CASE NO.
---------




IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE	                 JUDGMENT NO. LC/H/701/2013

HARARE, 3 AND 6 DECEMBER 2013	    	       CASE NO. LC/CON/H/49/2013

In the matter between:-

OCTAVIA MOYO AND ANOTHER				Applicant

And

BEV KING FLOWERS						Respondent

Before The Honourable F.C. Maxwell, Judge

(IN CHAMBERS)

MAXWELL J.;

This is a chamber application for condonation of late filing of appeal against a decision of the Respondent’s Disciplinary Committee.  Applicants were dismissed on 25 September 2012.  The letters notifying them of the results of the disciplinary hearing and penalty of dismissal have an endorsement “refused to sign”.  Applicants however claim that they were not given a dismissal letter but were given minutes of the hearing.  They further claim to have been advised by NECCS for Agriculture that they were out of time to appeal.  They also indicate that at the Ministry of Labour the Respondent said the Labour Officer has no jurisdiction over the case and they then approached this court.

For an Applicant for condonation to succeed there must be a reasonable explanation for the delay and strong prospects of success on appeal.

See Paul Gary Friendship v Cargo Carriers limited and Another SC 1/13

Grant v Plumbers 1949 (2) SA 470

In terms of the dismissal letter, Applicants were advised that:

“If you are not happy with the results you may appeal to the Appeals Committee through the Group Human Resources Manager within (7) seven days of receiving this determination.”

It is trite that a litigant should exhaust domestic remedies before approaching the Courts unless there is good reason for not doing so.

See Girjac Services (Pvt) Ltd v Mudzingwa 1999 (1) ZLR 243 @ 249.

No good reason has been given for not pursuing domestic remedies.  In terms of the relevant Code of Conduct an appeal from the decision of the Disciplinary Committee lies with the Appeals Committee, not this Court.  There is no basis for condoning the late noting of appeal as the appeal would be improperly before this Court.

Consequently the application fails.

Wherefore it is ordered as follows:

The application for condonation of late noting of appeal, being without merit, be and is hereby dismissed.