JUDGMENT NO. CCZ 16/2016
CONST. APPLICATION CCZ 4/2016
(“the Act”) on the basis that the provisions infringe the fundamental right to equal protection of
the law enshrined in s 56(1) of the Constitution. The applicant also took as an additional point that
s 98(14) of the Act infringes the right to fair labour practices enshrined in s 65(1) of the
Constitution.
The second to the sixth respondents were employees of the applicant until they were
dismissed for misconduct. They were aggrieved by the dismissal and raised a complaint of unfair
labour practice with a labour officer, claiming overtime and several other allowances that they
alleged the applicant owed them. When conciliation failed to yield a settlement, the dispute was
referred to compulsory arbitration. The Arbitrator found in favour of the second to the sixth
respondents.
The applicant filed an appeal with the Labour Court, but failed to file heads of
argument, leading to the second to the sixth respondents successfully applying to the Labour Court
for dismissal of the appeal for want of prosecution. The second to sixth respondents then applied
to the Arbitrator for quantification of the award. They were awarded USD$99 882-60. They then
applied to the High Court to have the arbitral award registered as an order of the High Court. The
High Court granted the application for registration.
The applicant noted an appeal to the Labour Court against the quantification. In the
meantime the second to sixth respondents armed with a writ of execution proceeded to attach the
applicant’s property. The applicant immediately filed an application for stay of execution of the
writ with the High Court. The application was dismissed. This application was then made.
2