The appellant appeals against the dismissal of his appeal against conviction and sentence by the High Court (“the court a quo”) on 21 May 2019. On 11 July 2016, the appellant was convicted by a Regional Magistrate (the trial court) at Harare of one count of rape. He was sentenced to 14 years’ imprisonment of which 4 years imprisonment was suspended for 5 years on the customary conditions of future good conduct. Dissatisfied, he unsuccessfully appealed to the court a quo, against both conviction and sentence. More
This is an interlocutory appeal against the judgment of the High Court (“the court a quo”) dismissing the appellant’s application for recusal of the presiding judge in the court a quo. The appeal is brought without leave as the question of leave does not arise. This is because the dismissal of an application for recusal has the effect of a final and definitive order. In Moch v Nedtravel 1996 (3) SA 1 (A) the Appellate Court held that no leave is required in such an interlocutory appeal. No issues arise from that observation in this case. I therefore proceed to... More
MAKONI JA: This is an opposed application for leave to appeal made in terms of s 44 of the High Court Act [Chapter 7:06] as read with r20 (1) of the Supreme Court Rules, 2018.
The applicant was convicted of rape and sentenced to an effective 10 years imprisonment by the Harare Regional Court on 11 July 2016. His appeal against conviction and sentence was dismissed by the High Court on 29 May 2019. He sought leave to appeal to this Court, against the dismissal of his appeal, before the High court which leave was declined on 10 December 2020... More
This is an appealagainst the whole judgment of the High Court dated 20 January 2020, dismissing an application to strike down s58 of the Income Tax Act [Chapter 23:06] for violating the right to equal protection of the law and the right to administrative justice as provided by ss 56 and 68 of the Constitution of Zimbabwe, 2013. More
The appellant was employed by the respondent as a sales representative. On 7 July 2014, the appellant was suspended from employment and charged with misconduct for breaching s 4(f) and 4 (g) of the Labour (National Employment Code of Conduct) Regulations SI 15 of 2006(hereinafter referred to as “SI 15 of 2006”). The charges comprised of incompetence and inefficiency in performance of duties, failure to meet monthly targets and failure to carry out duties as per the job description. More
