Kabungo v Zambia Consolidated Copper Mines Ltd (SCZ Appeal 63 of 1998) [1999] ZMSC 83 (2 June 1999)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ZAMBIA SCZ APPEAL Mo.63 OF 1998 HOLDEN AT NDOLA (CIVIL JURISDICTION) BETWEEN: MICHEAL CHEWE KABUNGO APPELLANT AND ZAMBIA CONSOLIDATED COPPER MINES LIMITED RESPONDENT Coran: Bweupe, D. C. J., Chaila and Lewanika, JJS 1st June 1999 and 2nd June 1999 For the Appellant: Dr. J. Soko, Josias and Partners For the Respondent: Ms. M. Ngcabo, Legal Counsel, Z. C. C. M. JUDGMENT Chaila, J. S. delivered the judgment of the court. This is an appeal against the decision of the High Court dismissing the Appellant's case for wrongful dismissal. The facts of this case briefly were that the appellant was an employee of the Respondent Company. At the place where he was working the Studs belonging to the Z. C. C. M. disappeared and the appellant was implicated. The matter was investigated by the Hine Police. The Appellant was later put on disciplinary charge. He was then dismissed. Dr. Soko relied mainly on one ground of appeal. This ground Is: ■The learned Judge further erred when he referred to the Studs in issue as that of the Defendant and failed to consider the fact that the Appellant and PW.2 had been confined by force and assaulted by Defendant's Hine Police Officers to extract the statements referred to’. In support of this ground Dr. Soko referred us to the case of Kamayoyo to find that the learned trial Judge misapprehended the facts and urged us to reverse the findings. He argued further that the statements which the Mine Police Officers took were done under duress In that the appellant was subjected to torture. Dr. Soko argued that if the learned trial Judge had properly evaluated the facts he would have found that the appellant was entitled to some benefits. J2 : On behalf of the respondent Ms. Ngombo, Legal Counsel relied heavily on the written arguments. She argued that there was no evidence from the appellant to show that the statement he made and which statement is part of the record was taken as a result of the assault. She argued that the evidence on record showed that there was no assault and that the learned trial Judge was ® a firm ground to find in favour of the respondent. We have seriously considered the submission of the learned Counsel and evidence on record. We further considered the case of Kamayoyo and the documents presented before the lower court. We are quite satisfied that the statement given by the appellant was not given as a result of any duress or torture. The evidence further shows that the respondent company followed proper disciplinary procedure. The appellant was properly charged and was afforded an opportunity to exculpate himself. We cannot find in any way any ground on which to impeach the judgment of the lower court. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed with costs. B. K. BWEUPE DEPUTY CHIEF JUSTICE M. S. CHAILA SUPREME COURT JUDGE D. M. LEWANIKA SUPREME COURT JUDGE