Former president Robert Mugabe and his wife have been taken to the High Court by their former general manager, Stanley Nhari, who is demanding $756 401 after they allegedly forced him to work with no pay.
Nhari cited Mugabe, Grace and the couple’s family business, Gushungo Holdings (Pvt) Ltd, as first, second and third respondents respectively in summons filed last Thursday.
In his declaration, Nhari claims the former president and his wife used illegitimate influence to force him to relinquish his position in October 2015.
He was allegedly ordered to continue working without pay until November of the same year.
“In breach of the terms governing the relationship between the parties, first and second defendants by use of illegitimate influence, force and might required plaintiff (Nhari) to relinquish his position on October 6, 2015 but was, however, ordered to continue working for no outlay until November 6, 2015,” Nhari said.
“The acts of the defendants in interfering with the plaintiff’s prospects are wrongful and deliberate and resulted in plaintiff losing potential employment and consequently yielded a loss of $588 000, which is due from the defendants to the plaintiff.”
Nhari said Mugabe owed him $800 000 as a result of the labour dispute.
“As a result of the unlawful termination of the employment relationship, plaintiff is owed by defendants damages for a period extending from October 1, 2015 to November 6, 2015 being the sum of $8 909 computed on the basis of the salary that plaintiff was earning which sum the defendants have refused to pay,” Nhari said.
“Plaintiff is also owed $69 492 in accrued leave days reckoned from January 1, 2007 to November 6, 2015 such leave accruing at 25 days per year.
“At the time of termination of the relationship between the parties, plaintiff was entitled by arrangement to a motor vehicle or to the value of such vehicle being $90 000. Defendants have refused to allow plaintiff to recover this benefit.”
Nhari also said he was demanding compensation from Mugabe and Grace, who allegedly used the public media to denigrate him at various gatherings.
“Upon the enforced termination of the employment relationship, the defendants used public media to denigrate plaintiff at various gatherings in a manner that imperilled his future prospects of employment,” he said.
The matter is pending.
– The Standard