CHIKONYE & ANOR v PETERHOUSE 1999 (2) ZLR 329 (S)

Flynote

Employment — contract — termination — contract of fixed duration — employee not regarded as having been dismissed when contracts expired

Review — jurisdiction — High Court — domestic remedies not exhausted — when court may entertain application for review

Headnote

The appellants were employed by the respondent school as teachers. Their employment ceased. They claimed to have been unfairly dismissed. They took the matter to a labour relations officer who ordered their reinstatement. The school noted an appeal, but pending the appeal applied to the High Court for a declaration that the appellants' contracts were of fixed duration and had terminated by effluxion of time. The High Court upheld the school's contention. On appeal:

Held, that the High Court ought not to have entertained the application, as the question of the status of the contracts was one of the points to be decided on appeal to the senior labour relations officer. In addition, a declaration that the contracts were of fixed duration or not would not in practice finally resolve the matter, as there were other issues to be decided in the appeal to the senior labour relations officer. However, the decision of the judge a quo was not one that no reasonable judge could have reached, and so the exercise of his discretion could not be interfered with on appeal. Held, further, that the contracts were of fixed duration. Unless the contracts were renewed by the school, the appellants ceased to be employees. There was no obligation on the school to offer them permanent positions.