via Tsvangirai house, 62 cars attached | The Herald 27 August 2014 by Daniel Nemukuyu
MDC-T leader Mr Morgan Tsvangirai’s Strathaven, Harare, house and 62 party vehicles could be auctioned to pay off US$491 760 in labour damages to 13 party employees who were unlawfully dismissed in 2010.
The Deputy Sheriff is expected to attach 22 Isuzu trucks, eight Nissan trucks and several other vehicles listed on the writ of attachment.
A writ of attachment is a court order to attach or seize an asset. It is issued by a court to a law enforcement officer or sheriff.
A prejudgment writ of attachment may be used to freeze assets of a defendant while legal action is pending.
The 13 security personnel were unfairly dismissed and allegedly went home without any benefits under unclear circumstances.
The workers’ lawyer, Mr Obert Mawadze of Manase and Manase Legal Practitioners, obtained a writ of execution and the Deputy Sheriff is in the process of attaching the houses and the cars that are in Harare and at the party’s various provincial offices.
The awards took into account the position held by each worker and the period of employment in the party.
After working for several years at Harvest House, the workers were shocked to be informed of the termination of their contracts in 2010.
MDC-T initially promised to reinstate the workers, but the party made a U-turn and failed to honour the undertaking, prompting them to seek quantification.
This failed to settle the case and a dispute was declared, resulting in the arbitrator making a ruling.
Mr Munakira, who was a research officer with the Institute of Democratic Alternative of Zimbabwe, cited the then Prime Minister’s Office and Mr Tsvangirai as parties to the labour dispute.
He argued that the PM’s office unfairly treated him to an extent that he resigned citing unfair labour practices. He argued that the office owed him US$9 300, a figure that accrued from underpayment of his monthly salary over three years of employment.
He resigned citing ill-treatment, but the parties clashed on the amount due to him.
The matter had been referred to conciliation, but the parties later opted for an out-of-court settlement.