After hearing argument on September14 2018 I dismissed this application with costs.
I stated that the reasons would be furnished in writing.
On the same day, around 16:35 hrs, the Registrar placed a letter before me.
It was authored by the applicant’s legal practitioners. They were requesting the reasons for my decision for purposes of appeal.
These are those reasons.
This is a court application for review of the disciplinary proceedings wherein first respondent convicted applicant of contravening para 35 (1) of the schedule to the Police Act [Chapter 11:10] (“the Act”) as read with section 29 and 34 of... More
The two applicants’ were charged under the Police Act [Chapter 11:10] for contravening para 35 of the Schedule of offences to the Police Act, as read with ss 29 and 34 of the said Act.
On count one, the state alleges as follows;
“In that on 26 June 2017 and at or near C.I.D Chitungwiza offices, Chitungwiza, the defaulter, being a member of the Police Service, did wrongly and unlawfully acted in a manner reasonably likely to bring discredit to the Police Force, that is to say, the defaulter, after recovering a box containing 50 x 100ml bottles of broncleer... More
In this application there is no material dispute of facts. The undisputed facts are that the applicant is an engineering company whereas the 1st respondent is a bus operator carrying on business under the style of Jimmy Jimalo Luxury Tours. More
The applicants are seeking a provisional order interdicting the respondents from proceeding with the criminal proceedings which are at defence stage and currently under way against the applicants at Chegutu Magistrates Court in case number CRB CHG 674-76/18 pending the final determination of an application for review brought by the applicants under case number HC 9109/18. That application for review is pending in this court. The first respondent is The State which is responsible for Criminal prosecutions on behalf Zimbabwe and is represented by an officer responsible for the applicants’ trial. The second respondent whom I shall refer to as... More
The applicant applied, through the urgent chamber book, for spoliatory relief. He alleges that he is the holder of exclusive prospecting rights licence in a block of gold mine claims known as Danley Mine in Chakuri. He claims that he was in peaceful and undisturbed possession of the mining claims and was carrying out his prospecting operation when, on 24 August 2021, the first and third respondents despoiled him of the same. These, he avers, unlawfully took occupation of the mine stating that the fourth respondent authorized them to despoil him. The second respondent, he alleges, has commenced illegal mining... More
