Rangarirai Muchawayav Ministry of Lands & Rural Resettlement

### Preamble

IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE

JUDGMENT NO LC/H/436/2013

HARARE, 2nd SEPTEMBER 2013 & 13th SEPTEMBER 2013

CASE NO LC/H/485/2013

---------

IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE JUDGMENTNO LC/H/436/2013

HARARE, 2nd SEPTEMBER 2013 & 13th CASE NO LC/H/485/2013

SEPTEMBER 2013

RANGARIRAI MUCHAWAYA APPELLANT

Versus

MINISTRY OF LANDS & RURAL RESPONDENT

RESETTLEMENT

Before The Honourable L Hove : JUDGE

For the Appellant : V Mazhetese (Legal Practitioner)

For the Respondent : Ms Kuipa (Legal Practitioner)

HOVE J:

At the hearing of this matter a preliminary issue was raised by the respondent’s legal practitioner.

It was argued that the appeal was totally defective in that there was only one party before the court i.e. the appellant. This, it was argued was so because the respondent Ministry of Lands and Rural Resettlement is not a legal persona and it can therefore not sue or be sued.

It was submitted that the appellant ought to have cited the relevant minister and not the ministry.

The court was referred to the case of Gariya Safaris (Pvt) Ltd v Van Wyk 1996 (2) ZLR 246 as authority for the proposition that where a litigant has sued a non existent party, the appeal or proceedings are fatally defective and must be dismissed.

In response, the appellant’s representative submitted that it is a settled principle of law that it is undesirable that Labour matters be dealt with on the basis of legal technicalities but on their merits.

That the Minister to whom the headship of the Ministry has been assigned ought to have been cited as the nominal defendant is so by virtue of the provisions of s 3 of the State Liabilities Act Chapter 8:14.

Failure to cite the respondent properly is therefore an irregularity.

The case of Dalyn Mine v Musa Banda 1999 (1) ZLR 220 is authority to the fact that it is undesirable to solve Labour disputes on the basis of legal technicalities. But failure to cite a respondent means that there is no respondent to answer to the allegations and it makes the appeal before the court fatally defective. There is therefore no appeal before the court.

In the circumstances the appeal is struck off.

There is no order as to costs.

HOVE J

Judge – Labour Court

Mambara & Partners, appellant’s legal practitioners

Civil Division of the Attorney General’s Office, respondent’s legal practitioners