Tembo and Ors v Bank of Zambia (SCZ Appeal 32 of 1997) [1997] ZMSC 50 (30 September 1997)
The first judgment of the lower court, not having been appealed, remains enforceable and must be satisfied by the Bank of Zambia.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1997] ZMSC 50
- Parties
- Appellant: Jonas Tembo and Others; Respondent: Bank of Zambia
- Court
- Supreme Court of Zambia
- Jurisdiction
- Zambia
- Case Number
- SCZ Appeal 32 of 1997
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Redundancy, Collective Agreement, Enforcement of Judgments
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Jonas Tembo and Others
Appellant
Bank of Zambia
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Bank of Zambia complied with the enforceable judgment regarding redundancy payments
- 2 Whether the lower court erred in its subsequent interpretation of the redundancy payment obligations
Ratio Decidendi
The first judgment of the lower court, not having been appealed, remains enforceable and must be satisfied by the Bank of Zambia.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed
Orders
- The finding of the lower court is set aside
- The first judgment is to be satisfied and complied with
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ZAMBIA SCZ Appeal No. 32 of 1997 HOLDEN AT LUSAKA (Civil Jurisdiction) JONAS TEMBO AND OTHERS Appellants and BANK OF ZAMBIA Respondent CORAM: Chaila, Chirwa and Muzyamba JJ. S. 30th September, 1997 For the Appellants : Mr. C. K. Banda of Chifumu Banda and Associates, Lusaka For the Respondent : Mr. J. Mensah of A. Chimota Chambers, Lusaka JUDGMENT Chaila J. S. delivered the judgment of the court. The appellants were employees of the Bank of Zambia and were declared redundant after an agreement between their Union and the Bank. The employees took the Bank to the Industrial Relations Court on the interpretation of the Collective Agreement and payments made to them. The lower court made a decision in their favour and ordered that the effective date of redundancy should be 10th August, 1994 and that they should be paid salaries and allowances applicable at that time. The Bank did not appeal against that judgment. They went and made payments which did not satisfy the judgment of the lower court. The employees went back to the Industrial Relations Court to complain that the Bank had not complied with the judgment. The lower court gave a different interpretation .and declared that the Bank was right in making payments which it had done. The employees being unhappy with that interpretation appealed to this court. Mr. Mensah, -the Advocate for the Bank has conceded to the fact that the Bank never appealed against the first judgment of the lower court and that the judgment was still enforceable. He has taken a very wise course. The first / 2 . . :; J2 - judgment was never appealed against and is still enforceable. The Bank was therefore in error in calculating the redundancy package out side the judgment. By consent this appeal is allowed. The finding of the lower court is set aside and we order that the first judgment be satisfied and be complied with. As the Bank did concede to this appeal we make no order as to costs. M. S. Chai 1 a SUPREME COURT JUDGE D. K. Chi rwa SUPREME COURT JUDGE W. M. Muzyamba SUPREME COURT JUDGE