Judgment record
Pretty Makuni v Old Mutual Shared Services (Pvt) Ltd
[2021] ZWLC 58LC/H/58/20212021
Viewing: Word Document
Loading document...
Full text archive
Judgment text copy
A clean reading copy is shown below. Use Download for the original formatted document.
### Preamble IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE JUDGMENT NO LC/H/58/2021 HARARE, 18 MAY 2021 & 4 JUNE 2021 CASE NO LC/H/230/19 --------- IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE JUDGMENT NO LC/H/58/2021 HARARE, 18 MAY 2021& CASE NO LC/H/230/19 4 JUNE 2021 In the matter between:- PRETTY MAKUNI APPELLANT AND OLD MUTUAL SHARED SERVICES (PVT) LTD RESPONDENT Before the Honourable Kudya J For the Applicant S. Dizwani (Legal Practitioner) For the Respondent T. Chagudumba (Legal Practitioner) KUDYA, J: On the set down date of the appeal by the appellant against the respondents appeals bodys decision in a labor dispute between appellant and her employer the employer took the point that the appeal was bad at law as it attacked the hearing officer’s decision and not the appeals officer’s decision. It is only this point which is addressed by this ruling. It is apparent from a reading of the appeal grounds that it attacks the hearing officer’s findings and decision primarily. Even though in the introduction line the appellant says it is attacking the appeals officers’ decision she does not go on to do that. Her argument is that since the appeals officer almost verbatim agreed with the hearing officer’s findings and decision she did found it necessary to refer throughout to the failures of the hearing officer. It is patently clear from the opening paragraph of the appeal that what the employee wanted to attack were the findings by the appeal’s officer. Sadly she did not do such but instead chose to attack the hearing officer as if her appeal was against the hearing officer’s decision. For that reason the appeal is out of step with what the law requires and should thus be struck off the roll. IT IS ORDERED THAT Appeal being improperly before the court it be and is hereby struck off the roll with costs. Hove Legal Practice, Appellant’s legal Practitioners Atherstone and Cook, Respondent’s legal Practitioners