Veronica Tashu v Innscor Africa

### Preamble
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE
JUDGMENT NO LC/H/167/2021
HARARE, 15 JUNE 2021
8 OCTOBER 2021
CASE NO LC/H/APP/94/19
---------


IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE	   JUDGMENT NO LC/H/167/2021

HARARE, 15 JUNE   2021&			   CASE NO LC/H/APP/94/19

8  OCTOBER  2021

In the matter between:-

VERONICA TASHU					APPLICANT

AND

INNSCOR AFRICA						RESPONDENT

Before the Honourable Kudya J

For the Applicant			T. Deme  (Legal Practitioner)

For the Respondent			S. Pickup (Legal Practitioner)

KUDYA, J:

This is an application for quantification of damages due to the applicant employee following her successful appeal against dismissal from employment where she was rendering cashier services to the respondent employer.

Respondent concedes the claim in part but puts the applicant to the proof of the remainder. In particular respondent says it is prepared to pay appellant 24 months’ salary from 26 October 2009 to 18 October 2021 sum totalling $9120 at $380 per month.

On the other hand, applicant says she needs to be paid in addition to the 24 months’ period sums from 18 October 2011 to 30 November 2015 the last date being the date when respondent lost its appeal on the matter. Respondent says it is not prepared to pay for that extra period because in its view applicant repudiated the contract by not enforcing her reinstatement rights. It says applicant should have held herself available for work for that period. In its view her failure to do so means she repudiated the contract a fact which it accepted hence it was not prepared to pay her anything else beyond the 24 months’ salary is offering.

Applicant persists that she never repudiated her contract but that instead it is the respondent which repudiated by keeping telling her away each time she showed up to satisfy the reinstatement clause. She went to the extent of giving evidence under oath to the effect that she did not keep self away from work but was kept away by respondent.

No meaningful challenge of her evidence was made except the fact that the respondent reiterated that applicant had legal representation all throughout so she ought to have appreciated her rights in the case vis reinstatement. Applicant reasoned with the respondent that if indeed she absented self without lawful excuse and if respondent was keen on having her on at work it would have charged her with misconduct of being absent without leave.  The fact that it did not and the fact that no meaningful challenge of her testimony about being sent away by respondent was made fortified her case that she did not repudiate the contract.  In the ultimate it is clear that respondent does not have a good case on repudiation against applicant as set out in Meikles Store v Mwaita SC 21-07.  The applicant’s claim should therefore succeed in full.

IT IS ORDERED THAT

Application for quantification of damages being merited it be and hereby succeeds in its entirety.

Innscor Africa pays Veronica Tashu 73 months’ salary from 26 October 2009 to 30 November 2015 at $380 totalling $27,740.

Each party bears own costs.

Thoughts Deme Attorneys at Law, Applicant’s Legal Practitioners

Lunga Attorneys,  Respondent’s Legal Practitioner