Welcome to Midlands State University Library

Court Judgements



Browse Court Judgements by court
This is a case in which the sixteen Applicants seek to register a quantified arbitral award collectively amounting to US$26 352.00 for unlawful retrenchment by the Respondent. The registration of the quantified award through a chamber application was challenged by the Respondent who raised issues in limine on grounds that I will elaborate fully below. The genesis of the dispute is one that in the context of economic challenges, has increasingly come to sound like a stuck record. The employees received letters of termination from the Respondent, the employer, which cited “the hardships being faced”. Respondent purported to terminate their... More

The thirteen applicants are members of Printers Housing Cooperative Limited. It is common cause that sometime around 2005 they concluded individual standard form contracts of sale with the first respondent Douglas Nyaude a registered estate agent practicing under the style of Graham and Douglas, Real Estate Agent. The contracts were in respect of the sale of certain pieces of immovable properties mentioned in their respective contracts. More

On 29 July 2008 the plaintiff issued summons against the defendant for the following relief:- “(a) payment of the sum of US$750 000.00. (b) interest a tempore morae at the London Interbank rate for United States dollars 3.5% per annum from 1 September 2005 to date of payment. (c) Costs of suit. More

In their application the applicants stated that, “this is a review application in terms of s 26 and 27 of the High Court Act [Chapter 7:06] or for declaratory relief in terms of s 14 of the said Act and/or, alternatively, an application for relief in terms of s 4 of the Administrative Justice Act [Chapter 10:28]. More

This is an application for stay of execution of the judgment of this court granted in favour of the first respondent against the applicants in Case Number HC 8560/16. The judgment was granted on 24 May 2017. On 29 May 2017 the applicants instituted an application in terms of r 449 for the setting aside of that judgment. On 30 May 2017 they instituted the instant application under a certificate of urgency seeking stay of execution of that judgment. The application is opposed by the first respondent. More