A LOCAL airline, Nu-Aero trading as Fresh Air Avtour, has approached the Supreme Court challenging the High Court’s order granting former Big Brother Amplified (BBA) winner Wendall Parson the sum of $24 500, which was part of an ambassadorial deal between the latter and the airline.
BY CHARLES LAITON
After scooping the BBA award in 2011, Parson was approached by one Matipedza Karase who is cited in court papers as the applicant, representing the airline as its brand ambassador.
As part of the agreement, the firm undertook to use Parson’s name and services at a cost of $31 500 from September 1 to November 30 2011 and was scheduled to complete 31 flights.
However, Parson’s contract was allegedly prematurely terminated by the airline after the cancellation of the intended flights by the Civil Aviation Authority of Zimbabwe (CAAZ).
“The applicant [Karase] aver that due to the untimely and unexpected cancellation of all the flights by the Civil Aviation Authority of Zimbabwe (CAAZ) by way of a directive in an undated letter addressed to Nu-Aero, the latter [Parson] could only conduct one successful flight out of the total scheduled 31 flights, which meant he [Parson] performed one out of 31 of his obligations under the said contract,” Karase said.
Despite the non-completion of his flights, however, Parson claims he performed his obligation and made himself available to Nu-Aero, but in breach of the said agreement, the airline did not pay him his full amount, prompting him to approach the High Court which ruled in his favour.
- Chamisa under fire over US$120K donation
- Mavhunga puts DeMbare into Chibuku quarterfinals
- Pension funds bet on Cabora Bassa oilfields
- Councils defy govt fire tender directive
Keep Reading
According to the appeal under case number SC493/15 filed on Wednesday this week, Karase argued the High Court erred when it ruled in Parson’s favour by failing to uphold its defence that Parson did not perform the task he was assigned to do following the cancellation of flights by CAAZ.
“The court aquo erred in failing to make a finding that upon cancellation of the flights respondent [Parson] was not entitled to any payment, as the payment for the project was wholly dependent upon the flights; arising from the money paid by schoolchildren,” Karase said.
“The court aquo erred in failing to uphold that the contract was signed almost six weeks later and could therefore not have run from the period between September 23, 2011 to November 30, 2011.” The matter is yet to be set down for hearing in the third term.
