- The Zambia Gazette
- Subject Index
- Law scholarship
- Contact Us
In 2010 the Appellant was employed as a metre-reader. In 2011 the Appellant was re-designated as a cashier under the same employment terms. Following the re-designation, the Appellant was transferred to Mumbwa. The Appellant did not immediately take up the position and was charged with absenteeism from duty. He was later suspended and placed on half pay. After the suspension, the Appellant was asked to report for duty but only did so after a month. He continued to absent himself from work and was served with fresh disciplinary charges. At the second disciplinary hearing he was found guilty, dismissed and given 14 days to appeal. The 19 June 2013 appeal was unsuccessful and the Respondent's Managing Director wrote to the Appellant on 23 July 2013 advising him that he had exhausted the appellate procedure in ZESCO and that if the Appellant wished to pursue the matter further, he had to go to court. On 2 January 2014 the Appellant made his application for leave to lodge his complaint out of time claiming he had been pursuing other administrative channels which were not fruitful. The Court found no merit in the application and it was dismissed on the basis of inordinate delay and the absence of a plausible reason. The Appellant appealed.
Leave to file a complaint out of time is not granted as a matter of course as though the pursuer is merely pushing an open door. The granting of leave to file delayed complaints requires that discretion is exercised judiciously, there have to be sufficient reasons for the delay to seek redress in court after the incident complained of. The Appellant had presented a lazy effort and had no plausible reasons for the delay of almost 6 months. Jonathan Lwimba Mwila v World Vision Zambia SCZ Appeal No 193 of 2005 (unreported) followed