THE Labour Court has struck off the roll an application for leave to appeal filed by former Rural Infrastructure Development Agency employee Tendayi Bertha Tagwireyi, ruling that her legal team failed to attach written reasons for the judgment they sought to challenge.
Labour Court Judge Justice Lawrence Murasi upheld preliminary objections from the agency, stating that without the written reasons, the court could not assess whether the proposed appeal had any prospects of success.
Tagwireyi had applied for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court after the Labour Court struck her review application off the roll in October 2025 under case number LC/H/837/25.
She intended to challenge that decision, arguing that the court had improperly dismissed her application on technical grounds.
The case originates from disciplinary proceedings instituted against Tagwireyi by the agency.
A disciplinary committee found her guilty of misconduct and recommended her dismissal.
After an unsuccessful internal appeal to the minister of State for National Security in the President’s Office, she approached the Labour Court for review.
Her legal practitioner, Absolom Muchandiona, argued that the leave-to-appeal application complied with the Labour Act and Labour Court Rules because it included draft grounds of appeal.
- High Court throws out ex-NetOne boss application
- City council boss bounces back
- Labour, and administrative courts to go digital month-end
- Worker fired for reporting boss ‘peeping over wall’ at him in toilet
Keep Reading
He further submitted that the court could rely on its own notes since the ex tempore judgment had been delivered orally in court.
However, agency counsel Talent Madzvamuse contended that the application was defective because no written reasons for the earlier ruling had been attached.
He told the court this prejudiced the respondents, who could not meaningfully respond to the grounds of appeal without understanding the reasoning behind the judgment being challenged.
Justice Murasi agreed with the respondent, emphasizing that written judgments are essential in the appeal process because they allow both litigants and appellate courts to grasp the basis upon which a decision was reached.
“The above sentiments from the apex court in that jurisdiction clearly point to the need for written reasons in the appeal process,” Justice Murasi said.
Justice Murasi cited Supreme Court authorities discouraging superior courts from interfering with incomplete proceedings where litigants still have an opportunity to correct defects and return to court.
Justice Murasi struck the application off the roll and ordered Tagwireyi to pay the agency’s legal costs on the ordinary scale.
