Telecel Zimbabwe v G Mwendesi & Another

### Preamble
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE
JUDGMENT
LC/H/406/14
HARARE 19TH MAY 2014
JUDGEMENT NO. LC/H/406/14
---------




IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE	JUDGMENT NO LC/H/406/14

HARARE 19TH MAY 2014						LC/REV/H/78/13

AND 4TH JULY, 2014

In the matter between:-

TELECEL ZIMBABWE				Applicant

And

G MWENDESI & ANOTHER			Respondents

Before The Honourable L Kudya, Judge

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF 19 MAY 2014

________________________________________________________________

On 19 May 2014 this Court handed down an order against the employees where the employer had applied to the Court in terms of Rule 19 (3) (a), to have the review application which it had filed with the court to be granted in default of the employees’ filing of heads of argument timeously as required by the rules.  The employees through their lawyers have requested this court to furnish them with the full reasons for that order and these are they

Rule 19 (3) (a) of the labour court rules makes it clear that where a party to proceedings in an appeal, review or application is legally represented such party shall be obliged to file heads of argument within prescribed times failing which the non-defaulting party may apply in chambers to the court for the matter to be disposed of as a default matter at the instance of the defaulting party.

In the instant case if the record is anything to go by the employees legal representatives were served with the employers heads of argument on 13 December as per certificate of service filed of record stamped 12 June 2014.

The employees were therefore obliged by the rules to have within 14 days of receipt of the employer’s heads to have filed their heads.  They did not do so till 27 March 2014 when the chamber application seeking the grant of the relief on default of filing of heads by the employees was made.

Rule 19 (4) makes it directory for the applicant to serve the other party with the application.  The employer chose not to serve the employees as allowed by the rules and prayed that the review be granted in default of heads by the employees.

The court was therefore satisfied from the documents before it that the employer had a good case for the default order and it is under these circumstances that the order of 19 May 2014 was granted in chambers.

L KUDYA

JUDGE – LABOUR COURT