This is an application for leave to execute pending appeal. The application is made pursuant to a judgment I granted with costs in favour of the applicant on 11 May 2020 under judgment number HB 63/20 and case number HC 1776/19. The applicant had sought an order declaring the directive of the 2nd respondent halting the applicant’s and 1st respondent’s mining operations on a certain contested claim to be invalid, which application I granted, ordering the applicant to resume mining operations. The 1st respondent appealed against the judgment, effectively suspending its execution. The applicant seeks leave of this court to... More
This is an application for a declaratory made in terms of section 14 of the High Court Act (Chapter 9:06). The applicant seeks to nullify the decision made by the 1st respondent on 27th January 2018. The nature of the relief sought in the draft order is in the following terms:
“It is ordered that;
1. The order issued by the 1st respondent on 17th January 2018 be and is hereby declared unlawful and invalid.
2. The applicant be and is hereby allowed to rescind mining operations at Clifton 15 Mine.
3. The respondent be and is hereby ordered t... More
1. This is an application for my recusal. The brief facts of this matter are that an application for rescission of judgment was placed before me and it was set down for the 18 October 2022. On the 17 October 2022, Muvingi & Mugadza Legal Practitioners (respondent’s legal practitioners) addressed a letter to the Registrar of this court ostensibly indicating that I ought to recuse myself from the hearing of the application for rescission of judgment. More
This is an application for leave to execute the judgment of this court in Rose Natalie Heuer v Lugania Investments (Pvt) Ltd and Others HB 84-20 handed down by MABHIKWA J on 21st May 2020 pending an appeal noted with the Supreme Court.
The applicant contends that the appeal noted by 1st respondent was filed without the bona fide intention of testing the correctness of the judgment but was noted for the sole purpose of buying time to enable 1st respondent to continue having its mining equipment at the applicant’s mining claims at Empress Mine in defiance of an extant... More
MABHIKWA J: The applicant is a former employee of the respondent. On 7 March 2014, he was suspended on allegations of misconduct. He was given a letter to that effect. He was charged with conduct inconsistent with the fulfillment of express or implied terms of his contract of employment. More
