A Bulawayo High Court Justice Martin Makonese has dismissed
a bid by Zvishavane-Mberengwa mining association to have the election of
Henrietta Rushwaya as president of the Zimbabwe Miners Federation (ZMF)
overturned after he ruled that the application was not urgent.
The Zvishavane-Mberengwa Mining Association (ZMMA) filed an
urgent High Court chamber application seeking to bar her from representing the
interests of ZMF after she had appealed to the Supreme Court against a recent
High Court order which stripped her of the presidency of
the small-scale miners’ body.
Justice Makonese sitting in Bulawayo ruled that the chamber
application was not urgent and should be dismissed with costs.
“It is my view that the application before me is not
urgent. In any event the order sought in the draft order is not competent as it
is not supported by the averments in the founding affidavit,” ruled Justice
Makonese last week.
“In his submissions, Mr Tavengwa (representing ZMMA),
appearing for the applicant sought to argue that the application for leave to
execute pending appeal was not being pursued at this stage and that the only
relief sought is for an interdict. It was clear that not much thought was put
in preparing and filing this application.”
ZMMA had rushed to the High Court seeking an interdict to
bar Rushwaya from performing her duties as president of ZMF pending the
finalisation of her appeal by the highest court.
Rushwaya lost the presidency of the association after the
High Court declared that the results and proceedings of the elections, which
brought her to the helm of the small-scale miners’ body, were invalid. She was,
however, then elected ZMF president in June last year, but a group of
small-scale miners under the ZMMA challenged her election.
In a case filed at the High Court in Bulawayo, under case
number 1652/18, the miners accused Rushwaya of using “unorthodox” means to take
over the ZMF leadership.
But the judge said despite the ruling by Justice Nokuthula
Moyo, which overturned Rushwaya’s presidency had been appealed against; the
matter was not before the Supreme Court.
“The applicant (ZMMA) indicates that this court must grant
an interdict essentially regarding the same dispute. This approach smacks of
abuse of court process.
“Such conduct should be discouraged. The respondent has
been put out of pocket in opposing this claim. Respondent is entitled to
recover their costs in full. In the result, the application is dismissed with
costs on an attorney and client scale. In the result, the application is
dismissed with costs on an attorney and client scale.”
ZMMA was represented by Mutuso, Taruvinga and Mhiribidi
Attorneys, while applicant’s legal practitioners Messrs Antonio and Dzevetero
acted on behalf of Rushwaya.Newsday
0 comments:
Post a Comment