Mullewa v Cadecom (MATTER NO. 24 OF 2001) (NULL) [2002] MWIRC 33 (01 July 2002);

Share
Download: 

IN THE INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COURT OF MALAWI

LILONGWE REGISTRY

MATTER NO. 24 OF 2001


BETWEEN:


ZACHARY D. MULLEWA………………………………..APPLICANT

and

CADECOM……………………………………………..…RESPONDENT


CORAM:   HON. M.C.C. MKANDAWIRE, CHAIRMAN
                  Applicant – Present
Respondent – Present (Represented by Miss I. Nkhoma of Counsel
Davie Mpakani– Official Interpreter


J U D G M E N T

Matters in Issue : Unfair termination of employment

         Introduction

         The Applicant in this matter is Zachary Dominic Mullewa. He filed this case against the Respondents CADECOM – Lilongwe on a trade dispute of unfair termination of employment and in his Statement of Claim, he prays to this Court that he be awarded the following:-

(1)     
Salary withheld;

(2)     
Rentals;

(3)     
Transport;
(4)     
Personal money he lent to the office;

(5)     
Leave grant;

(6)     
Annual increment; and

(7)     
Expenses for his numerous trips to the Office of the Ombudsman.

All these quantified amount to K757,455=00

The Respondents in defence have denied these allegations. They claim that the Applicant’s employment was fairly terminated.

SURVEY OF EVIDENCE

It is settled as a fact that the Applicant herein was employed by the Respondents on 6th of June, 1996. The Applicant as a development director had a milliard of responsibilities. He itemized all of them and they amounted to fifteen. I have not listed them down in the way he did because they are not at all in issue in this case. When the Applicant took over office, he found that donors for the Lilongwe Diocese had stopped pouring in money. He however worked tirelessly until money started coming in again. Thus by February 2000, donors started funding the diocese again. On the 26th of February 200, a board meeting for CADECOM was constituted and later on the board confronted the Applicant with allegations of financial mismanagement to which he had to answer. To put it in a nutshell, there were several cheques that were signed by the Applicant alone without the other signatory. All these cheques were honoured by National Bank yet there was no second signatory as per the required standards of CADECOM. A check on these cheques further revealed that they mostly involved events to which the Applicant was an interested party. These included cheques such as:-

1.      
General Auto Parts