The 1st Applicant filed a statement of complaint together with an application under rule 24(1), (2) & (3) of Labour Court Rules (LC Rules), GN 106/2007 and section 53(1) of the Employment and Labour Relations Act, 6/2004 seeking inter alia for temporary injunction, reinstatement, payment of salary and remuneration and damages for psychological torture and character assassination. The Respondents objected to the application on the ground that the affidavit was fatally defective, because it was sworn by the 1st Applicant only while there were 4 parties cited in the suit. There was no proof that the said Applicant was authorized to swear on their behalf nor an order permitting him to act in a representative capacity. Further, the names of the other 3 Applicants appeared in the citation only, they did not sign the pleadings contrary to the requirements of rule 6(1)(c) of the LC Rules. Neither were their interests in the suit indicated. In response, the Applicant submitted that, there is no law which obliged every party to a suit to swear an affidavit and that an affidavit by one complainant is enough to prove to the Court that the matter being complained of is real. Further, it was submitted that even if the other parties had been improperly joined in the suit, such a misjoinder was not fatal in terms of rule 44(8) of the LC Rules since the Court may sever the misjoined parties and proceed with the suit with only the 1st Applicant/complainant.