Jackson Muzivi (first respondent) was employed by First Mutual Life Assurance (applicant) until 2002. Part of his employment benefits remained unpaid, valued at Z$864 million in defunct Zimbabwean dollars in 2011. The applicant had approached the Supreme Court regarding the Labour Court's jurisdiction to convert the amount owed (SC 583/18), with the decision pending. Meanwhile, Muzivi approached the magistrate's court under s13(2) of the Labour Act for delayed payment of employment benefits (at least 21 years). On 4 November 2019, the applicant was found guilty of contravening the section and fined Z$900,000 payable in three instalments. The applicant appealed on 8 November 2019. On 6 December 2019, a writ of execution was issued and the applicant's property was attached on 9 December 2019. The applicant then brought this urgent chamber application to stay the attachment and sale in execution pending the appeal (CA 715/19).
The court granted a provisional order on 12 December 2019 suspending the attachment and sale in execution of the applicant's property pursuant to the writ of execution dated 6 December 2019. The Sheriff was ordered to temporarily release all the applicant's property attached under that writ. The stay of execution was to remain in effect pending the hearing of CA 715/19. The first respondent retained the right to challenge the order upon its confirmation.
A provisional order staying execution pending appeal will be granted where: (1) the applicant establishes a prima facie right through valid grounds of appeal; (2) there is real apprehension of harm, particularly where substantial amounts are involved and property essential to daily business operations is attached; (3) the balance of convenience favours the applicant where there is no guarantee of recovery if the appeal succeeds and no proof the respondent can repay the amount; and (4) there is no other satisfactory remedy. Specifically, the imposition of a criminal fine for delayed payment of employment benefits is highly irregular and creates a prima facie right to relief where the actual amount owed remains in moribund currency and its conversion into real currency has not been judicially determined in pending Supreme Court proceedings.
The court expressed doubt about the applicant's interpretation of s348 of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act [Chapter 9:07], noting that the use of the word 'may' indicates the magistrate's discretion to issue a warrant of execution is not mandatory, and therefore obtaining a warrant outside these specific parameters is unlikely to be irregular. The court also observed that it is common practice that where the offender is a company, imprisonment or community service are not appropriate forms of punishment, leaving fines as the appropriate sanction.
This case is significant in Zimbabwean jurisprudence as it addresses the interplay between criminal sanctions for unfair labour practices (delayed payment of benefits) and civil disputes regarding currency conversion of employment benefits. It demonstrates the courts' approach to granting interim relief where execution is sought on a fine imposed for delayed payment, but the actual amount owed in real currency has not yet been judicially determined. The case also illustrates the application of the four requirements for provisional orders in the context of stays of execution, particularly where there are pending appeals and unresolved questions regarding the quantum of liability in a transitioning currency environment.