The High Court has ordered the National Pharmaceutical Company of Zimbabwe (NatPharm) to pay its former procurement manager almost US$1 million for unfair dismissal.
The court also ordered NatPharm to recompense Raguel Mthombeni for costs of suit.
Mthombeni, who cited NatPharm, was employed by the company as procurement manager and his contract was terminated on notice on July 14, 2020.
He challenged the termination of his contract and the matter was referred for conciliation before labour officer, F V Marovanyika.
On May 19, 2021, the labour officer issued a certificate of no settlement and a draft ruling was subsequently issued on September 8, 2022.
On September 14, 2022, the labour officer filed an application for confirmation of the draft ruling in terms of the then section 93 (5a) of the Act in the Labour Court.
The application was opposed by NatPharm.
In January, 2023, the Labour Court granted the application for confirmation of the draft ruling with amendments ordering NatPharm to pay Mthombeni ZWL$12 804 277,56.
- Fresh land invasions hit Whitecliff
- Pomona cash row escalates
- Border Timbers targets European markets
- SA name strong A side for Zim tour
Keep Reading
Mthombeni was aggrieved by that judgment and he filed an appeal.
On March 20, this year, the Supreme Court set aside the Labour Court judgment.
The matter was remitted to the same judge to determine all issues placed before the court.
After this decision, the Labour Court heard the application for confirmation of the draft ruling on May 14.
The court upheld a point in limine raised by NatPharm and struck the application off the roll for being fatally defective.
This resulted in Mthombeni approaching the High Court for registration of the labour officer’s ruling.
The application was opposed by NatPharm.
Mthombeni’s heads of argument were filed on July 8 and served on NatPharm's legal practitioners on July 9.
NatPharm's lawyers did not respond to the heads of argument within the prescribed period which lapsed on July 23.
NatPharm lawyers applied for condonation for late filing and the removal of bar and the application was opposed by Mthombeni.
NatPharm's lawyer submitted before High Court judge Justice Regis Dembure that the reason why the heads of argument were filed late was due to an infraction caused by him.
Mthombeni submitted that NatPharm's lawyers wanted to fraudulently misrepresent facts.
He asked the court to dismiss NatPharm’s application for condonation from the bar saying it should have filed its affidavit before the court sat.
Justice Dembure said NatPharm lawyers took the application for condonation lightly.
“I did not find any reasonable or arguable points or grounds of opposition to the registration of the ruling from the submissions by counsel and the opposing papers,” the judge said before he granted the application.
"While the above considerations namely the extent of the delay, the reasonableness of the explanation for the delay and the prospects of success are universally accepted as the most important ones, the list is not exhaustive.
"This abuse of the court process was conduct that warranted an order for punitive costs against the respondent.
“There must be consequences for a litigant who thinks he can abuse the process of the court to avoid the inevitable. Not only was this a sheer waste of time, NatPharm has been shown to be a litigant that wants to play football with the court.”
NatPharm was ordered to pay Mathombeni US$935 511,57.
