This
is an appeal against the whole judgment of the Labour Court sitting
at Bulawayo, handed down on 4 March 2015.
The
facts of the matter are that the appellant was employed by the
respondent as a teacher at Majiji High School. He appeared before a
disciplinary committee facing allegations of improper association
with a minor student in contravention of paragraph 7 of the First
Schedule to the Public Service Regulations (2000) as read with
section 45 of the same Regulations.
The
minor concerned was a student at the said school. He was convicted
and discharged from employment. Aggrieved, he appealed to the Labour
Court, which dismissed the appeal. He has now appealed to this Court.
The
Labour Court found it necessary to hear evidence from the appellant,
the minor student, and a number of witnesses who had given evidence
at the disciplinary committee hearing. The Labour Court found that
the evidence of most of the witnesses, concerning the love affair
between the appellant and the minor student, was hearsay. This was
because all that the witnesses could attest to was the fact that the
minor student had fallen pregnant which fact the Labour Court
correctly found to be irrelevant to the charge that he faced.
The
Labour Court found that the minor child gave a detailed account of
her love relationship with the appellant - including details which
only participants in the relationship would know. Against such
detailed evidence from the student, the court found that the
appellant gave a bare denial to the allegations and failed to cross
examine her on material aspects of the charge.
The
appellant was pre-occupied with the issue of paternity, which, in
itself, was not relevant to the charge. His failure to cross-examine
the minor student on material aspects meant that her evidence stood
unchallenged. The Labour Court found the student to be a credible
witness and stated that it had no reason to disbelieve her. It then
found that the appellant did improperly associate with the minor
student.
It
is trite that an Appellate Court will not lightly interfere with the
lower court's findings on the credibility of witnesses. An
Appellate Court will only interfere where it finds that such findings
are plainly wrong. It has not been shown, in this case, that the
findings of the Labour Court were plainly wrong. Accordingly, no
basis has been established upon which this Court can interfere with
the Labour Court's findings on the credibility of the minor child.
In
the final result, we find that this appeal lacks merit and ought to
be dismissed. Accordingly, it is ordered as follows:
The
appeal be and is hereby dismissed with costs.
