Shepherd Matandare v Madz Contractors (Pvt) Ltd

### Preamble
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE
JUDGMENT
NO LC/H/316/16
HELD AT HARARE 9 MARCH 2016
CASE NO
JUDGMENT NO LC/H/316/16
---------




IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE			JUDGMENT NO LC/H/316/16

HELD AT HARARE 9 MARCH 2016				CASE NO LC/H/788/15

& 13 MAY 2016

In the matter between:

SHEPHERD MATANDARE				Appellant

And

MADZ CONTRACTORS (PVT) LTD			Respondent

Before The Honourable B S Chidziva, Judge

For Appellant			Mr Piki (Legal Practitioner)

For Respondent		Mr N Chikomo (Legal Practitioner)

CHIDZIVA, J:

This is an appeal against an arbitration award by Honourable B Mudiwa that was handed on 18 August 2015.  The arbitrator ordered as follows

“Wherefore after carefully analysing the facts and the aw, I make the following award

The claimant is entitled to arrear salaries

The respondent is hereby ordered to pay the claimant US$9600 subject to relevant statutory deduction

This amount to be paid in two equal  monthly instalments starting from 30 September 2015

The full and final amount to be paid by 30 November 2015.

I hereby award accordingly.”

The appellant filed the notice of appeal on 21 September 2015.  The respondent filed its response on 29 September 2015.  On 22 February 2016 the respondent filed a counter appeal.  When the parties appeared before me on 9 March 2016 the appellant’s lawyer Mr Piki raised a point in limine to the effect that the respondent had not complied with rule 15 of the Labour Court rules.  It was submitted that the respondent should have applied for condonation.

The respondent submitted that there had been a mix up at respondent’s place of employment but the court was to proceed and consider the counter claim.

Rule 15 (1) of the Labour Court Rules S.I. 59/2006 states that appeals should be filed within 21 days from the date when the appellant receives the decision determination, direction or award.

The award in this case was handed down on 18 August 2015.  The counter appeal was filed on 22 February 2016.  The counter appeal is well out of time.  Respondent should have applied for condonation for late filing of appeal before filing the counter appeal.

In view of this therefore the counter appeal is not properly before this court.

I therefore order as follows

The point in limine be and is hereby upheld.

The respondent is given 30 days within which to file its application for condonation.

If the respondent fails to file the appeal within the stipulated time the Registrar shall proceed to set down the main appeal for hearing.

If respondent files the application for condonation within the stipulated time the appeal shall be set down for hearing after the conclusion of the application for condonation for late filing of appeal.

Respondent to bear costs.

IEG Musimbe & Partners, appellant’s legal practitioners

Ngarava Moyo & Chikono, respondent’s legal practitioners