In this application Tregers Industries (“the applicant”) seeks a refund of the sum of $2,183,861,227-71 paid by its bankers to the Zimbabwe Revenue Authority (“the respondent”) at the instance and instructions of the respondent. The application is opposed. More
The applicant seeks the following relief-
“TERMS OF FINAL ORDER SOUGHT
That you show cause to the Honourable Court why a final order should not be made in the following terms-
1. The interim relief be and is hereby confirmed.
2. The execution of a garnishee of accounts during contestation of tax liability be and is hereby declared unlawful.
3. Section 69 of the Income Tax Act [Chapter 23:06] be and is hereby declared unconstitutional and struck down.
4. That the respondent shall pay the costs of this suit on a higher scale of legal practitioner and client only if... More
This is an urgent application for stay of execution of a judgment given in Case No. HC 12328/12. The judgment registered for the purposes of enforcement an arbitral award rendered in terms of section 98 of the Labour Act[Cap 28:01] in favour of the first respondent and against the applicant. The award was submitted for registration in terms of section 98(14) of that Act. The salient facts which culminated in the filing of the instant urgent chamber applicationmay be summarised as follows: More
The applicant seeks a spoliation order in the form of a provisional order couched as follows:
“TERMS OF THE FINAL ORDER SOUGHT
That you show cause to this Honourable Court why a final order should not be made in the following terms.
(a) The forcible ejectment from Wolverhampton Farm of the applicant by the first to third respondents and all those acting in concert with them is unlawful.
(b) The cutting of the applicant’s gum plantation and sale of the timber by the first respondent and those acting through him is unlawful.
(c) The fourth respondent shall do all that... More
The applicant approached this court seeking the following order:
“1. It is be and is hereby declared that, barring, ejectment and or interference of the Applicant’s attendance in the pre-budget consultative meetings and National Assembly on account of Applicant’s wearing of a colourful Rastafari jacket constitutes a violation of his right to freedom of conscience and religion as set out under Section 60 of the Constitution.
2. it is be and is hereby declared that Section 76(1)(a) as read with section 76(5) of the National Assembly Standing Rules and Orders permits the Applicant to wear his Rastafari colourful jacket in... More
