On the 24th June, 2014 Applicant applied to the Ministry of Public Service, Labour and Social Welfare for the issuance of a Show Cause Order seeking that pending the issuance of a disposal order, the threatened collective job action be terminated.
The parties appeared before a Labour Officer who after hearing submissions recommended to the Minister that he issues a Show Cause Order. More
At the onset of oral argument respondent raised a point in limine. Appellant opposed the same. The point is succinctly set out in respondent’s heads of argument thus,
“1. It is respectfully submitted that the appeal is not properly before this honourable court as there is no right of appeal against a draft ruling of a labour officer made in terms of section 16 of the Labour Amendment Act, 2015.” More
The applicant municipality seeks an order compelling the respondent to release its plant, machinery and equipment which it avers is unlawfully in the custody of the respondents. More
The applicant seeks an order of rei vindicatio. It seeks recovery of its property namely- motor vehicle, a Toyota Hilux Double Cab Registration Number AAE 7098, HP 450 laptop, Samsung Galaxy S5 and a Samsung tablet 4 presently in the possession of the respondent without the applicant’s consent. More
On 31 January 2017 I ruled that the application placed before me was not urgent. The applicant has asked for the full reasons for my decisions. These are the reasons as pointed out to the parties on the date of the ruling:The applicant is a municipal authority duly established in terms of the law.
The first respondent is a duly registered commercial bank.
The second respondent is cited in his official capacity.
The applicant and the first respondent were engaged in a dispute in case No. HC 6800/15. The court action reached a pre-trial stage whereat the parties entered into... More
This is an application for confirmation of the provincial order granted by this court on 6 September 2016. The respondents contest the confirmation of the provisional order. More
This is an urgent chamber application for an interdict. The facts are as follows:-
The applicant requested for land from the eleventh and twelfth respondents. The request was granted and the applicant allocated the land to 1 3000 applicants on its waiting list on a pre-service sale basis. The beneficiaries contributed towards the development of the land in terms of the applicant’s procedures. A project known as Nyatsime Housing Project Scheme (NHPS) was established in 2005. The development has now reached the stage of sewer pipe connections, water connections and putting of roads. More
The background facts to this application are largely common cause. The applicant is a registered trust and is concerned with inter-alia governance issues of the Chitungwiza Municipal area. The first respondent is the Minister responsible for the administration of the Urban Councils Act [Chapter 29:15]. The second respondent is the Harare Metropolitan Province Provincial Administrator. He co-ordinates development issues within the Harare Metropolitan Province. The second respondent is appointed by the first respondent in his capacity of the Minister of Local Government and Public Works. For the avoidance of doubt it must be noted that Chitungwiza Municipal area falls under... More
The appellant, Chiverere Contractors issued summons in the magistrates court against the respondents in November 2014claiming undisturbed possession of office 602,Pockets Building at corner Jason Moyo Avenue and Angwa Streetand the eviction of the second respondent from the said office 602. More
This judgment is in respect of two matters HC 901/18 and HC 4290/18. In HC 901/18 the applicant “Chivero” seeks the eviction of the respondent “Velocity” from a quarry site known as Hunyani 159 Idaho Farm ‘the claim’. In HC 4290/18 “Velocity” the respondent filed an application for the dismissal of HC 901/18 for want of prosecution. After hearing the application for dismissal in HC 4290/18 I dismissed it and indicated the reasons would be incorporated in the main judgment herein. More
The appellant was convicted on his own plea of guilty to a charge of negligent driving as defined in s 52 (2) (a) of the Road Traffic Act [Chapter 13:11]. The appellant who was driving a Toyota Ipsum was alleged to have rammed into a Honda Ballade motor vehicle which was turning to Mutare Sports Club. More
This is an application for the determination of the special plea of prescription and for absolution from the instance at the close of the plaintiff’s case. More
On 5 November 2021 in case SC 250/19 judgement number SC138/21 the Supreme Court issued an order, on appeal overturning the decision of this court of 10 April 2019 in case HC 6567/17. Of significance is paragraph 2.1 of the order stating that:
“The plaintiff’s claim for eviction of the respondent and all those claiming title through him from house number 12 Le Roux Drive, Hillside, Harare is granted.” More
