Welcome to Midlands State University Library

Court Judgements



Browse Court Judgements by court
This is an application for the upliftment of the bar operating against the applicant in HC 5817/15. The events leading up to the present application are set out in the founding affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant sworn to by Raymond Maxime Smithlock who deposed as follows: More

The respondent, as the plaintiff, issued summons against the four excipients, as the defendants. The precise relief which the respondent seeks is set out in the summons as follows: “(a) An order declaring that he is a 30% shareholder of DMC Holdings (Private) Limited (1st Defendant) and consequently has an interest in Christmas Gift (Private) Limited (2nd Defendant) and in the land held by 2nd Defendant being the Remainder of Christmas Gift held under Deed of Transfer No. 820/51 and Deed of Transfer No. 2681/13. (b) An order declaring that because of his interest in 2nd Defendant and the land... More

This is an application for the review of a decision to retrench approved by the 1st respondent on the 30th of May 2005, in terms of section 12C of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01]. The grounds for review are that the 1st respondent approved the retrenchment of the applicants by the 2nd respondent, firstly, while the question as to who could lawfully retrench the applicants was sub judice, secondly, without having heard the applicants on the merits of the matter and, thirdly, by failing to incorporate the issue of motor vehicles in the terms of retrenchment. More

The applicant in this matter claims the sum of US$40,000 in terms of a loan agreement concluded with the respondent on 31 August 2010. The respondent was to repay the amount lent by way of four instalments of US$10,000 from September to December 2010. He has failed to do so despite several demands. The applicant seeks repayment of the full amount together with interest, collection commission and costs on a higher scale. More

The 2nd and 3rd applicants are registered legal practitioners who practice in partnership under the name Antonio & Dzvetero Legal Practitioners. This is an application brought in terms of section 27 (1) of the High Court Act [Chapter 7:06], as read with Order 33 of the High Court Rules, 1971 (the previous Rules), and the common law. In addition, the application relied on section 14 of the High Court Act, the Administrative Justice Act [Chapter 10:28], and the Constitution of Zimbabwe. The applicants cited the Executive Secretary of the Law Society in his official capacity as the official, vested by... More