Zinondo v CAFCA Ltd. (Civil Appeal SC 214 of 2017; SC 64 of 2017) [2017] ZWSC 64 (24 July 2017)
The applicant failed to provide a reasonable explanation for default, lacked bona fides in her application for rescission, and had no prospects of success on appeal as salary differences within the same grade are permissible if the Collective Bargaining Agreement is not violated.
- Citation
- [2017] ZWSC 64
- Parties
- Applicant: Thokozile Zinondo; Respondent: CAFCA Limited
- Court
- Supreme Court of Zimbabwe
- Jurisdiction
- Zimbabwe
- Judgment Date
- 24 July 2017
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal SC 214 of 2017 ; SC 64 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to Supreme Court Against Labour Court Decision
- Outcome
- Application dismissed with costs
- Legal Topics
- Rescission of Default Judgment, Prospects of Success, Employment Contract, Collective Bargaining Agreement, Salary Discrimination
- Source Language
- English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Thokozile Zinondo
Applicant
CAFCA Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to Supreme Court Against Labour Court Decision
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant established good and sufficient cause for rescission of default judgment
- 2 Whether the applicant had prospects of success on appeal regarding alleged salary underpayment
Ratio Decidendi
The applicant failed to provide a reasonable explanation for default, lacked bona fides in her application for rescission, and had no prospects of success on appeal as salary differences within the same grade are permissible if the Collective Bargaining Agreement is not violated.
Court Disposition
Application dismissed with costs
Orders
- Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment