Zimbabwe United Passenger Company v National Employment Council for the Transport Operating Industry

### Preamble
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE
JUDGMENT
LC/H/808/2014
HARARE, 18 NOVEMBER 2014
CASE NO.
JUDGMENT NO. LC/H/808/2014
---------




IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE	 JUDGMENT NO. LC/H/808/2014

HARARE, 18 NOVEMBER 2014		     	        CASE NO. LC/H/REV/77/14

AND 19 DECEMBER 2014

In the matter between:-

ZIMBABWE UNITED PASSENGER COMPANY			Applicant

And

NATIONAL EMPLOYMENT COUNCIL FOR THE			Respondent

TRANSPORT OPERATING INDUSTRY

Before Honourable B.S. Chidziva, Judge

For Applicant		Mr. T. E. Gumbo (Legal Practitioner)

For Respondent		Mr. A. Demo (Legal Practitioner)

CHIDZIVA, J:

This is an application for review of the decision that was made by the Respondent.  On the 3rd of January 2014 the Applicant made an application to the Respondent for an exemption from compliance with a 6% wage increase.  The Applicant sought to be exempted from compliance with the approved increase for twelve (12) months starting from July 2013 to June 2014 but the Respondent only allowed a one month exemption for June 2014.

The Respondent has however raised a point in limine.  Respondent has submitted that the application is fatally defective in that the employees who are part to the exemption proceedings were not cited in this case.

The Applicant in Response told the court that the application is not defective because the decision that sought to be reviewed was made by the Respondent and not the employees.

It is common cause that the employees were called to testify by the Respondent to clarify certain issues.

PATEL J in the case of John Simon Rodger & Ors v Frik Muller & Ors HH/2/10 had this to say about joinder of parties.

“While I accept that the non-joinder of a party is not necessarily and invariably fatal to the continuance or determination of any mater, it is trite that Rule 89 (1) does not absolve a litigant of the obligation to cite all relevant parties.  The discretion of the court in this regard must be exercised so as to ensure that all persons who might be affected by its determination of the issues in dispute be afforded the opportunity to be heard before the determination is actually made.”

The employees are interested parties in this case.  The employees should be cited in this case as well because they will be affected by the decision.

In view of the foregoing therefore this Court finds that the Review proceedings are not properly before this court.

CHINAWA LAW CHAMBERS, Applicant’s legal practitioners

CHIHAMBAKWE, MUTIZWA & PARTNERS, Respondent’s legal practitioners