National Handling Services v Christopher Hove

### Preamble
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE
JUDGMENT NO LC/H/664/2013
HARARE, 20 NOVEMBER 2013
CASE NO LC/H/237B/2013
In the matter between:-
---------




IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE	JUDGMENT NO LC/H/664/2013

HARARE, 20 NOVEMBER 2013 &		 CASE NO LC/H/237B/2013

In the matter between:-

NATIONAL HANDLING SERVICES			APPLICANT

Versus

CHRISTOPHER HOVE					RESPONDENT

Before The Honourable L Kudya	:	Judge

(IN CHAMBERS)

KUDYA J:

Applicant (“the employer”) has applied to this Court to uplift the bar operating against it as well as to condone the late noting of the upliftment of the bar in a case where it had appealed against a decision made by the arbitrator in favour of the Respondent (“employee”).

Facts of the case make very sad reading if one notes the manner in which the employer has dealt with this matter and effectively gone against the grain of ensuring that there be finality to litigation. Instant application fell as another application where same Applicant had been bared for filing heads out of time. As it sought to regularise the position it committed, a further breach by flouting the rules/time lines again. As if that is not enough the reason for its delay is given as being attributable to its legal practitioners. Surprisingly there is nothing filed of record from the legal practitioners confirming the default reasons. It is apparent that the Applicant is not keen to …. the matter prosecuted to finality if the repeated default vis compliance with the rules are anything to go by.

Both parties cited extensive authorities on what Courts should consider in applications of this nature to grant relief. Since the law is settled, this Court has not deem it necessary to repeat it once again as it is apparent on the papers filed before this Court. What is particularly striking as already indicated is the repeated failure by the Applicant to adhere to the rules of Court. Whilst it is conceded that rules are made for the Court and not the Court for the rules and that labour matters be concluded on merits not on technicalities (See Dalny Mine v Banda) where the litigant deliberately flouts such as he/she should not expect the Court’s sympathy. It is apparent that there is no plausible explanation given for the non-compliance by the Applicant and if the submissions on record are anything to go by the Applicant has slim prospects of success on appeal thus making instant application a bad one for the granting of the relief sought. It should therefore fail.

IT IS ORDERED THAT

Application for upliftment of bar and condonation of late noting of the upliftment of the bar being without merit, it be and is hereby dismissed with costs.

L KUDYA

JUDGE – LABOUR COURT

Chihambakwe, Mutizwa & Partners, applicant’s legal practitioners

Matsikidze & Mucheche, respondent’s legal practitioners