William Chisangowerota v Ashanti Goldfields Zimbabwe Ltd

### Preamble
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE
JUDGEMENT
NO LC/H/614/13
HELD AT HARARE 30TH NOVEMBER 2012
CASE NO
JUDGEMENT NO LC/H/614/13
---------




IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE	    JUDGEMENT NO LC/H/614/13

HELD AT HARARE 30TH NOVEMBER 2012	   CASE NO LC/H/233/2002

AND 22ND NOVEMBER 2013

WILLIAM CHISANGOWEROTA				Applicant

ASHANTI GOLDFIELDS ZIMBABWE LTD		Respondent

Before The Honourable G Musariri, G

For Applicant		Mr S Pelewelo, Unionist

For Respondent		Mr C Kwirira, Attorney

MUSARIRI, G

By judgement dated 18th September 2006 referenced LC/H/177/06 this Court ordered Respondent to either reinstate Applicant’s employment or pay him damages in lieu of reinstatement.  On 20th January 2010 Applicant filed this application for assessment of damages.  After a number of glitches, Applicant finally filed a breakdown of his claim at the end of last year.  The claim was denominated in United States dollars (USD).

At the hearing of the matter, Respondent raised a point in limine.  It was to the effect that there was no legal basis for a claim in USD in respect of a judgment made at a time when the Zimbabwean Dollar (ZWD) was the sole legal tender.  Applicant opposed this argument.

I consider that the answer lies in a reading of our law in conjunction with International Labour Standards (ILS).  The applicable standards are set out in the Termination Of Employment Convention 1982 (No. 158).  Its Article 10 provides that,

“If the bodies referred to in Article 8 of this Convention find that termination is unjustified… they shall be empowered to order payment of adequate compensation or such other relief as may be deemed appropriate.”

The Convention was passed by the International Labour Organisation (ILO).  Zimbabwe is a member of ILO.  I consider that our Labour Laws ought to be interpreted in the spirit of the international standards Zimbabwe aspires to.  Section 89 (2) (c) III of our Labour Act Chapter 28:01 (hereafter called the Act) gives this Court power to order reinstatement provided that,

“any such determination shall specify an amount of damages to be

awarded to the employee concerned as an alternative to reinstatement or employment.”

This ties in with the aforesaid international standard of adequate compensation. I am fortified in this view by the Preamble to the Act which defines it, inter alia, as,

“An Act to declare and define the fundamental rights of employees; to give effect to the international obligations of the Republic of Zimbabwe as a member state of the International Labour Organisation…”

1 therefore interpret the damages under the Act as connoting the adequate compensation set out in the ILO Convention No 158.  In 2009 Zimbabwe adopted a multi-currency regime in which both ZWD and USD are legal tender.  However ZWD is no longer in use even by the government of Zimbabwe.  It is effectively a moribund currency.  An award in such currency cannot by any measure be considered as adequate compensation.  USD has become the predominant currency in use in Zimbabwe.  As such Applicant was within his rights to claim damages denominated in a viable currency.

Wherefore it is ordered that,

Respondent’s point in limine (whether there is a basis for an award in United States dollars) is hereby dismissed; and

Each party shall bear its own costs.

G. MUSARIRI

J U D G E