By Eddie Chikamhi
Former national team coach Heath Streak has applied for an order for provisional liquidation of Zimbabwe Cricket after the Association failed to respond to his claims to pay him, and his sacked staff, $198 695.77 in outstanding dues.
Streak was relieved of his duties in April this year following the Chevrons’ failure to qualify for next year’s ICC World Cup in a tournament held at home.
In papers filed at the High Court yesterday, Streak’s lawyers cited Zimbabwe Cricket as the first respondent and the newly-installed Minister of Youth, Sport, Arts and Recreation Kirsty Coventry as the second respondent.
The Sports Commission and the Master of High Court are the third and fourth respondents.
Streak and his backroom staff, which included South African batting expert Lance Klusener, fitness trainer Sean Bell and Wayne James also claim that their contracts were “illegally” terminated in April.
According to the papers, Streak is owed $128 762.95, Klusener $11 757.93, Bell $43 999.23 and James who was his assistant coach $14 175.66.
His lawyers – GN Mlotshwa and Company – have invoked Section 14 of the Insolvency Act (Chapter 06:07) seeking the liquidation of the organisation and have identified Winsley Militala of Petwin and Executor Trust Company as the provisional liquidator. “This is an application in terms of Section 6 of the Insolvency Act (Chapter 6:07) for an order of liquidation of the 1st Respondent in that the 1st Respondent is unable to pay its debts as and when they become due in the normal course of business. “Furthermore, it is just and equitable that the 1st Respondent be wound up and creditors be paid off their debts…
“The Applicant(s) are all employees of the 1st Respondent whose fixed term of employment contracts were illegally terminated by 1st Respondent.
“The 1st Respondent has failed to pay the Applicant’s salaries and other emoluments as and when they fell due and payable.
“Moreover, the 1st Respondent also failed to pay match fees and other benefits to the Applicant. Despite demand, the 1st Respondent has failed or neglected to pay the debts in question.
“It is clear that the First Respondent is generally unable to pay its debts as and when they become due. “The Board of Directors have run the affairs of the 1st Respondent in a reckless and negligent manner such that it has failed to pay its employees and creditors on time.
“The 1st Respondent has mismanaged loans and grants that were advanced to it by the International Cricket Council and has failed to make meaningful repayments.
“I am further advised that the 1st Respondent does not fall under the given exceptions in terms of the Insolvency Act upon which this application is premised and accordingly this application is proper under the circumstances,” reads the application.