judgment of that person, which shall be final, the raising of the question is merely frivolous or vexations.” [6] By order dated 9th October 2020 the Industrial Court stayed the main application before it, which sought a declarator, and referred the constitutional question to the High Court for determination. In the context of this referral the phrase “subordinate to the High Court,” as used in Section 35 (3) of the Constitution, deserves a fleeting comment. At that point in time there was a lively debate in this jurisdiction about whether the Industrial Court is subordinate to the High Court or not. In this respect see the case of DERRICK DUBE v EZULWINI MUNICIPALITY & 6 OTHERS. 1 That debate saw some dogmatic scholarship that ignored unmistakable international trends and sought to create, of this jurisdiction, an island of Labour Law jurisprudence. Until the High Court judgment in SWAZILAND REVENUE AUTHORITY & 3 OTHES v PRESIDING JUDGES OF THE INDUSTRIAL COURT & 2 OTHERS 2 the preponderance of opinion was that the Industrial Court and the Industrial Court of Appeal are subordinate to the High Court. In the said judgment the High Court, sitting as a full bench, came to the conclusion that the High Court was not qualified to review judgments of the Industrial Court and 1 (91/2016) [2018] SZHC 49, 30th November 2018. Swaziland Revenue Authority and 3 Others v Presiding Judges of the Industrial Court and 2 Others (1742/17) [2018] SZHC 209, 26th September 2018. 2 7