The dispute in casu has its genesis in matters of employment. It behoves me to give a brief chronology of what transpired that resulted in the applicant finding itself in the quagmire in which it now is. The parties were embroiled in a salary review dispute which culminated in an arbitral hearing before arbitrator C Sithole. On 15 December, 2010 the arbitrator made an award in favour of the applicant’s employees, awarding them an across the board increment backdated to September, 2008. The parties were given until 15 February, 2011 to agree on the mode of payment of the arrears... More
This is an application for registration of an arbitral award. The application is opposed on the basis that the Respondent appealed against the award to the Labour Court.
The papers before me show that the appeal in question was dismissed by the Labour Court on 8 July 2011 and there is no appeal pending at the moment. That is not to say it would have made any difference at all to the Respondent’s case because it has not argued that the operation of the arbitral award was suspended by any order of court. In terms of section 92E (2) of... More
The plaintiff‘s claim is for delictual damages for pain and suffering and loss of amenities. The plaintiff was arrested at his workplace on 12 November 2016 on allegations of unlawful entry into premises together with his workmates and detained at Budiriro Police Station. He claims that whilst in detention, the first defendant assaulted him resulting in him sustaining injuries. He was taken to court where he was acquitted of the charges he was facing. The plaintiff’s case is that the first defendant who is a member of the Zimbabwe Republic Police assaulted him together with other unidentified officers whilst he... More
The basis of the application is that the applicant is the current owner of a certain piece of land called Lot 1 of Orange Grove Hartley (“the farm”). On 12 December 2003 the Minister of Lands, Land Reform and Resettlement (the Minister) published a notice of acquisition of the farm in the Government Gazettee. More
The appellant in this case was charged and convicted of assault as defined in section 89 (1) (a) of the Criminal Law Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]. Upon his conviction he was sentenced to 12 months imprisonment of which 4 months imprisonment were suspended for 5 years on the usual condition of future good conduct. More
