Posts and Telecommunications Corporation v Mhaka (HH 127 of 2003) [2003] ZWHHC 127 (26 August 2003)

Posts and Telecommunications Corporation v Mhaka (HH 127 of 2003) [2003] ZWHHC 127 (26 August 2003)

The respondent made material misrepresentations and failed to disclose a material relationship, both of which induced the applicant to enter into the employment contract. These acts constituted fraudulent misrepresentation and non-disclosure, entitling the applicant to rescind the contract. However, restitution was denied as the applicant benefited from the respondent's satisfactory performance.

Citation
[2003] ZWHHC 127
Parties
Applicant: Posts and Telecommunications Corporation; Respondent: Winfreda Ndakaiteyi Mhaka
Court
Harare High Court
Jurisdiction
Zimbabwe
Judgment Date
26 August 2003
Case Number
HH 127 of 2003
Procedural Posture
Opposed Application / Judgment
Outcome
Contract declared null and void; no restitution; costs awarded to applicant.
Legal Topics
Misrepresentation, Fraudulent Non Disclosure, Rescission of Contract, Restitutio in Integrum
Source Language
English
Employment Law Contract Law Misrepresentation Fraudulent Non Disclosure Rescission of Contract Restitutio in Integrum

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Posts and Telecommunications Corporation

Applicant

Winfreda Ndakaiteyi Mhaka

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Opposed Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent misrepresented her qualifications and experience in her application for employment
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to rescind the employment contract on grounds of misrepresentation and non-disclosure
  3. 3 Whether restitution should follow rescission in the circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent made material misrepresentations and failed to disclose a material relationship, both of which induced the applicant to enter into the employment contract. These acts constituted fraudulent misrepresentation and non-disclosure, entitling the applicant to rescind the contract. However, restitution was denied as the applicant benefited from the respondent's satisfactory performance.

Court Disposition

Contract declared null and void; no restitution; costs awarded to applicant.

Orders

  • The contract of employment between the applicant and the respondent is declared null and void.
  • The respondent is allowed to retain all salary and benefits received from the applicant in terms of the nullified contract.