BY JAMES MUTASA

Labour Court Judge, Justice Lawrence Murasi recently dismissed an application for condonation of an appeal by Peace Moyo and 10 other former Peace Security Company (Pvt) Ltd employees, who were seeking to be reinstated, for lack of merit, ordering  them to meet the ex-employer’s costs of suit.

In his judgment, Murasi gave a detailed chronology of the matter thus, “this is an application for condonation of the late filing of an appeal. The matter has been hogged by various ‘stops and starts’ from inception. The Designated Agent for the Security Industry issued her determination on 31 July 2023. Applicants were supposed to file their appeal within 21 days, which they did. This was under Case Number LCH657/23. At the hearing of the matter on 12 February 2024 before Justice Kachambwa, the appeal was struck off the roll as it was deemed to be defective.”

He added that; “An application for condonation of the appeal was filed under Case Number LCH209/24. This was granted by Justice Hove and Applicants were ordered to file the appeal within ten days of the Order. The appeal was filed under Case Number LCH 486/24. The appeal was withdrawn by the Applicants on 10 June 2024. Another application for condonation was filed under Case Number LCH613/24 and was placed before Justice Kudya. This was struck off the roll as the relief sought was stated to have been granted by Justice Hove. This was on 22 July 2024. Another application for reinstatement under Case Number LCH941/24 was heard by Justice Kachambwa on 11 November 2024. This was also struck off on the date of the hearing. The present application is the sixth approach to this Court by the Applicants.

Elvis Dondo of Saunyama and Dondo Legal Practitioners who represented the 11 former employees had argued that the main reason the Applicants were approaching the Court and failing to make headway was that they were self actors and were not well versed with the procedure. The other issue he stated was that most of the time was consumed by filing applications which were not successful and that there was no other explanation for the delay in filing the appeal.

On the prospects of success, Dondo said, “the matter could largely be answered mathematically, the figures that were contained in the contracts of employment and those that were reflected in the pay slips did not add up”.

But Timothy Chinyanganya a legal practitioner with Madzivire Attorneys at Law, on behalf of Peace Security Company argued that what the Applicants were paid was what was contained and agreed to in the contracts of employment.

In his judgment Murasi states, ‘Applicants were indeed bungling from pillar to post. Reasons why their matters were being struck off the roll were made known to them. They did not take into account what was stated in those cases. The delay was indeed the result of tardiness, incompetence and negligence”.

“The time has come,’ went on Murasi, ‘to remind the legal profession of the old adage, vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt- roughly translated, the law will help the vigilant but not the sluggard”.

 “It is not open to the courts to rewrite a contract entered into between the parties or to excuse any of them from the consequences of the contract that they have freely and voluntarily accepted even if they are shown to be onerous or oppressive,” read the ruling.