Zimbabwe News Update
newzimbabwe
4 min read
by mary taruvingathe supreme court has dismissed an appeal by former agricultural and rural development authority (arda) chief executive officer erickson mvududu, bringing to an end his long-standing legal battle over his 2009 dismissal.the ruling, handed down recently, upheld previous decisions confirming the lawfulness of arda’s actions.
mvududu had argued that his termination was unlawful because it was effected without a disciplinary hearing and that the parastatal had no authority to dismiss him.“my termination was executed without following the established procedures, which violates not just my employment rights, but fundamental rights that should be protected under our constitution,” he submitted in his appeal.delivering the judgment, justice susan mavangira said the matter had already been conclusively determined.“the applicant’s legal maneuvers appear aimed at rehashing a matter that has been thoroughly adjudicated upon.“the supreme court has already ruled on the basis of his employment relationship, and his attempts to reassert his claims lack merit.”mvududu’s latest application for condonation and an extension of time to file further appeals was dismissed on the grounds that it lacked legal merit.
the court ruled that the arguments advanced were “a clear attempt to sidestep the supreme court’s definitive judgments, which have laid to rest the issues in question.”mvududu maintained that only the minister of agriculture, not arda, had authority over his employment.“it is the minister, not arda, that governs these employment issues.”however, the court said earlier rulings, including one by justice bharat patel had settled the dispute, finding no basis for reopening the matter.the judgment marks the conclusion of a legal fight spanning more than a decade. the supreme court has dismissed an appeal by former agricultural and rural development authority (arda) chief executive officer erickson mvududu, bringing to an end his long-standing legal battle over his 2009 dismissal.
the ruling, handed down recently, upheld previous decisions confirming the lawfulness of arda’s actions. mvududu had argued that his termination was unlawful because it was effected without a disciplinary hearing and that the parastatal had no authority to dismiss him. “my termination was executed without following the established procedures, which violates not just my employment rights, but fundamental rights that should be protected under our constitution,” he submitted in his appeal. delivering the judgment, justice susan mavangira said the matter had already been conclusively determined.
“the applicant’s legal maneuvers appear aimed at rehashing a matter that has been thoroughly adjudicated upon.“the supreme court has already ruled on the basis of his employment relationship, and his attempts to reassert his claims lack merit.”mvududu’s latest application for condonation and an extension of time to file further appeals was dismissed on the grounds that it lacked legal merit.
the court ruled that the arguments advanced were “a clear attempt to sidestep the supreme court’s definitive judgments, which have laid to rest the issues in question.”mvududu maintained that only the minister of agriculture, not arda, had authority over his employment.“it is the minister, not arda, that governs these employment issues.”however, the court said earlier rulings, including one by justice bharat patel had settled the dispute, finding no basis for reopening the matter.the judgment marks the conclusion of a legal fight spanning more than a decade. “the applicant’s legal maneuvers appear aimed at rehashing a matter that has been thoroughly adjudicated upon.
“the supreme court has already ruled on the basis of his employment relationship, and his attempts to reassert his claims lack merit.” mvududu’s latest application for condonation and an extension of time to file further appeals was dismissed on the grounds that it lacked legal merit. the court ruled that the arguments advanced were “a clear attempt to sidestep the supreme court’s definitive judgments, which have laid to rest the issues in question.” mvududu maintained that only the minister of agriculture, not arda, had authority over his employment.
“it is the minister, not arda, that governs these employment issues.”however, the court said earlier rulings, including one by justice bharat patel had settled the dispute, finding no basis for reopening the matter.the judgment marks the conclusion of a legal fight spanning more than a decade. “it is the minister, not arda, that governs these employment issues.”
