WATER AUTHORITY WORKERS UNION OF ZIMBABWE v CITY OF HARARE

Key Issues

• {"issue_text":"Whether the application is urgent","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Respondent's letter of 23 March 2011 threatening to stop deductions; dues for March 2011 due for deduction at end of month"}
• {"issue_text":"Whether the certificate of urgency signed by the applicant's legal practitioner is valid","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Mr Mugandiwa, representing the applicant, certified the urgency"}
• {"issue_text":"Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to hear the application","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Labour Court has concurrent jurisdiction; applicant seeks interdict which Labour Court cannot grant"}
• {"issue_text":"Whether the applicant has established a prima facie right to the interdict","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Applicant is registered trade union; arbitral award ordered continued deductions; respondent had been making deductions"}
• {"issue_text":"Whether the applicant will suffer irreparable harm if interdict is not granted","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"March 2011 dues due for deduction; direct collection from members may not succeed on short notice"}
• {"issue_text":"Whether balance of convenience favors granting interdict","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Respondent faces potential prosecution; applicant's operations may be crippled; legislature intended efficient deduction system"}
• {"issue_text":"Whether there is adequate alternative remedy","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Direct collection from members suggested by respondent"}

Background