Two questions arose for decision in this matter; firstly, whether a private company is entitled to bring a private prosecution and, secondly, whether the Attorney-General has discretion to issue or withhold the certificate nolle prosequi where he declines to prosecute at the public instance. The questions arose in the following circumstances.
The applicant, a private company incorporated in terms of the laws of Zimbabwe and focused on telecommunications, discovered a potentially massive fraud perpetrated against it with prejudice of around US$1 700 000 and reported the matter to the police. The police carried out investigations under CID serious frauds and... More
The respondent was a senior employee of the applicant, holding the post of commercial director. On account of his employment, he enjoyed the use of a company motor vehicle, a Toyota Prado. On 5 February 2010 the respondent’s contract of employment was terminated pursuant to a disciplinary hearing. The respondent has appealed against that decision of the disciplinary authority. The appeal is pending before the Labour Court. In the meantime, the applicant has sought to repossess the Toyota Prado issued to the respondent on account of his employment, arguing that despite the noting of the appeal, the respondent is no... More
This is an appeal against the mandatory minimum sentence of $374 251 198-00, which was equal to the value of the foreign currency that the appellant dealt in without the approval of the regulatory authority, that was imposed by the Regional Magistrate sitting at Harare on 1 April 2004. This sentence was predicated on her finding that there were no “special reasons”, in this matter, for the imposition of a lesser fine. More
The facts of this matter are well set out in the judgment of my sister MUREMBA J in case number HH 269/17.
It is therefore unnecessary for me to repeat the same facts. I must point out, however, that MUREMBA J did not decide this same application on the merits. Instead, she dismissed the application on the procedural ground that the relief should have been sought through an application for review, rather than a court application for a declaratory order.
On appeal, the judgment in case number HH 269/17 was set aside in its entirety. The Supreme Court remitted the... More
The applicant has been in the business of providing internet services since 1997. It is suing the first respondent (POTRAZ) as a body corporate and authority responsible for the licensing and regulation of telecommunication service providers in terms of s 30 of the Postal and Telecommunications Act [Chapter 12:05]. More
