MATANDA-MOYO J: Counsel for the applicants withdrew
the application after conceding that the order sought had been overtaken by
events. The application sought to bar the respondent from conducting Zimbabwe
Teachers Association (ZIMTA) national elections which ran from 22 – 25 April
2005 in Victoria Falls. The application was heard on 17 October 2013 well after
such elections had taken place. It was incompetent for the court to bar
elections which had already been conducted. Thus the concession by applicants
counsel was properly made.
Counsel for the respondent submitted that this was a case where the court
should express its displeasure by awarding costs on a higher scale. I am fully
persuaded by such argument considering the manner the application has been
handled. Applicants unsuccessfully attempted to bar the conducting of the
elections through an urgent chamber application number HC 2766/13. The matter
was held not to be urgent. Applicants proceeded to file an ordinary court
application seeking the same remedy on 17 April 2013. Respondent filed its
opposing affidavit on 3 May 2013 after the elections were held. Such facts were
brought to the attention of the applicants. However applicants persisted with
the application by filing an answering affidavit and subsequently heads of
argument. Applicants even argued the matter when it was apparent from the onset
that the order sought had been overtaken by events.
Accordingly it is ordered as follows;-
The application is withdrawn with costs on a higher scale.
Munangati & Associates
– Applicants' legal practitioners
Messrs
Mbidzo, Muchadehama & Makoni – respondent's legal
practitioners
