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
On 22 January 2021 seeking the following provisional order:
“TERMS OF THE ORDER SOUGHT
That the respondents show cause why a final order should not be made in the following terms;
1. That the provisional order be and is hereby confirmed.
2. That the use of excessive force and assaulting applicant or any member of the public during enforcement of Covid-19 lockdown regulations by the respondents be and is hereby declared unconstitutional.
3. That the failure by the respondents to observe social distancing, sanitizing suspects before putting them in police holding cells, putting applicant or anyone in overcrowded holding cells... More
The appellant was convicted of one count of theft as defined in s 113 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act, [Cap 9:23] on his own plea of guilty on 8 July 2008. He was sentenced to 36 months imprisonment of which 6 months was suspended on condition of good behaviour. A further 6 months were suspended on condition that the appellant makes restitution in the sum of ZW$5,5 trillion by 31 December 2008 leaving an effective sentence of 24 months upon his compliance with the stated conditions. He appealed against both conviction and sentence. More
This is an application to declare invalid the proceedings instituted by the 1st to 8th Respondents undercover of case number HC 1057/19 and the order obtained in default on the 23rd July 2019, unlawful and illegal. Consequently relief is sought to the effect that the 2nd Applicant be reinstated on the property called Munjungwe Conservancy. More
After hearing submissions from counsel representing the applicant and second respondent I dismissed the urgent chamber application in casu with costs. I gave brief reasons. I did indicate that my written reasons could be furnished upon request.The applicant through its legal practitioners has requested to be furnished with the written reasons. These are the reasons. More
