Jairos Sarangika v Martin Millers Engineers (Private) Limited

### Preamble
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE
JUDGMENT NO. LC/H/761/2016
HARARE 13 OCTOBER 2016
CASE NO.
---------




IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE	                 JUDGMENT NO. LC/H/761/2016

HARARE 13 OCTOBER 2016				 CASE NO. LC/H/APP/693/16

AND 2 DECEMBER 2016

JAIROS SARANGIKA						Applicant

MARTIN MILLERS ENGINEERS				Respondent

(PRIVATE) LIMITED)

Before The Honourable G. Musariri, Judge:

For Applicant		Ms T. Manhanzva, Attorney

For Respondent		Mr B. Makururu, Attorney

MUSARIRI, J:

On 11th July 2016 Applicant filed in this Court an application “for quantification of damages”. Respondent opposed the application.  The basis of the opposition was set out in the affidavit of Ms Virginia Nyaungwa as follows,

“In Limine

This honourable (sic) no longer has jurisdiction to hear and determine the issue of quantification on the basis of the fact that it has already quantified the damages in the sum of Z$11,147,379,156-13. The court has accordingly become functus officio.  Applicant ought to have amended his claim in 2010 to reflect the currency he now wants to be employed.

The Applicant ought to have appealed against the order which is brutum fulmen in order to pave way for a proper quantification.”

Indeed this Court quantified Application’s damages in lieu of reinstatement by Respondent in a judgment date-stamped 5th November 2010 and referenced LC/H/327/10.  Apparently the judgment was not appealed to the Supreme Court.  It remains extant and binding upon the parties.  Accordingly the issue of quantification is res judicata. It cannot be resuscitated certainly not in this Court.

Applicant cited the case of Fleximail v Samanyau SC 21/14.  He argued that the case is authority allowing him to approach this Court for a second time seeking quantification this time in US dollars.  I respectfully disagree.  In that matter the Supreme Court was seized with an appeal. In the exercise of its powers as an appellate court, it remitted the matter to this Court for quantification.  The present application was brought by Applicant.  It was not remitted to the court by the Supreme Court. Thus the Fleximail authority does not apply herein.  Perhaps, in order to save the day for both parties, Respondent opted to abandon its point in limine.  However the gracious move was misguided.  The point raises the question of the Court’s jurisdiction.  Such cannot be conferred on the Court by a concession from a party.  The Court either has jurisdiction or it doesn’t.  The Court has already pronounced on the same subject in a matter involving the same parties.  The matter is simply res judicata. The Court is now functus officio.  It has no way of getting around the extant judgment unless same is reversed by the Supreme Court.

Wherefore it is ordered that,

The application for quantification of damages is hereby dismissed; and

Each party shall bear its own costs.

G. MUSARIRI

J-U-D-G-E