Pickglow Trading v Rumbidzai Moyo

### Preamble
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE
JUDGMENT NO. LC/H/722/2013
HELD IN HARARE, 12 NOVEMBER, 2013 &
31ST JANUARY, 2014
CASE NO. LC/484/13
---------




IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE 	JUDGMENT NO. LC/H/722/2013

HELD IN HARARE, 12 NOVEMBER, 2013 &                CASE NO. LC/484/13

31ST JANUARY, 2014

In the Matter Between

PICKGLOW TRADING				APPELANT

And

RUMBIDZAI MOYO 					RESPONDENT

Before The Honourable E. Makamure, J.

For Appellant:		Mr O. Shava (Legal Practitioner)

For Respondent:  	Mr A. Chambati (Legal Practitioner)

MAKAMURE J:

This is an appeal against the decision of an arbitrator sitting at Harare. It is not disputed that the grounds of appeal raise issues of fact. The respondent has raised a point in limine that since the grounds of appeal do not raise issues of law, the appeal is not properly before the court. It was submitted on behalf of the respondent that for that reason alone the appeal ought to be dismissed with costs. Mr Shava who appeared on behalf of the appellant on the other hand argued that the arbitrator’s factual findings are grossly misdirected to the extent that such misdirection amounts to a point of law. Counsel referred the court to authority for which the court is grateful.

The grounds of appeal are as follows:-

The Honourable Arbitrator erred at law in holding that the respondent was unfairly dismissed when in fact she had been properly found guilty of a dismissible offence.

The Honourable Arbitrator grossly misdirected himself on the facts and erred at law in failing to appreciate that respondent’s failure to accept transfer amounted to disobedience to lawful order.

The Honourable Arbitrator erred at law failing to appreciate that the appellant’s order which respondent disobeyed was an order envisaged in Section 4(a) of the Statutory Instrument 15 of 2006.

In Muzuva and United Bottlers (Pvt) Ltd. 1994(1) ZLR 220 it was stated that a question of law means: ‘First “a question which the law itself has authoritatively answered to the exclusion of the Court to answer the question as it thinks fit in accordance with what is considered to be the truth and justice of the matter.” Second it means a question of what the law is. Thus, an appeal on a question of law means an appeal for which the question for argument and determination is what the rule of law is in the matter.” And third, any question which is within the province of the judge instead of the jury is called a point of law’.

(See also Mutsuta & Another vsCagarPvt Ltd.  SC 47/09 and Afrofoodsvs.Blessing Muusha LC/MC/14/2011).

I have considered the learned Arbitrator’s decision.  The Arbitrator analysed the facts placed before them to the extent that all  three grounds were adequately covered. The decision is beyond reproach.

In my view therefore I find no misdirection on the part of the learned Arbitrator. I therefore find that there is no merit in the appeal.

Accordingly it is ordered that the appeal be and is hereby dismissed with costs.

Mbidzo, Muchadehama & Makoni , Appellant’s legal practitioners

Chambati & Mataka Attorneys, Respondent’s legal practitioners