Simbini Mhlanga v Petrozim Line (Pvt) Ltd

### Preamble
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE
JUDGMENT NO. LC/H/542/2016
HARARE, 7 JUNE 2016
CASE NO.
---------




IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE      JUDGMENT NO. LC/H/542/2016

HARARE, 7 JUNE 2016			           CASE NO. LC/H/APP/448/16

AND 23 SEPTEMBER 2016

In the matter between:-

SIMBINI MHLANGA						Applicant

And

PETROZIM LINE (PVT) LTD					Respondent

Before Honourable L. Kudya, Judge

For Applicant		B Ndhlovu (Legal Practitioner)

For Respondent		R G Zhuwarara (Legal Practitioner)

KUDYA, J:

This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court at the instance of the applicant employee.

The background to the matter is that on 18 March 2016 the Labour Court dismissed an appeal in a labour matter involving the applicant and the respondent employer.  It is the dismissal of the appeal which has prompted the applicant to apply to this court for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court in terms of Section 92 (f) Labour Court Act.  The basis for the application is that the applicant is of the view that a dismissal penalty was not in place for the infraction he committed of causing his motor vehicle to be repaired on the employer’s account without authority to do so.

It is settled law that leave can only be granted where the party seeking the same demonstrates that there is a point of law which he intends to have the Supreme Court deal with which the court a quo erred on see Dombodzvuku v CMED SC 31-12.  He also has to show that he has a demonstrable merited case on the grounds that he seeks to take up See Masekesa v Kingdom Financial Holdings SC 18-12.  The court agrees with the respondent that the applicant has not done anything more than simply argue that he is of view that he should have been given an educative penalty than to be out rightly dismissed.

The court in its judgment reasoned that the managerial position occupied by the applicant meant that he had to lead fellow employees by example.  Besides, it was also reasoned that matters where employer takes a serious view of the infraction can be visited with dismissal penalties.  It is clear that there is no point of law or a merited argument on the facts of the matter which the Supreme Court can be called upon to decide.  It would thus not serve any purpose to grant the sought after leave.

The application should therefore fail.

IT IS ORDERED THAT

Application for leave to appeal to Supreme Court being without merit it be and is hereby dismissed with costs.

Bothwell Ndhlovu Attorneys at Law, applicant’s legal practitioners

Dube, Manikai & Hwacha, respondent’s legal practitioners