The appellant is the registered owner of certain immovable property known as Stand 414 Midlands Township 5 of Uplands of Subdivision A of Waterfalls. This appeal is centered on the attachment in execution of the property at the instance of the first respondent in order to settle a debt due and owing to him by an entity known as Rufaro Marketing (Pvt) Ltd. More
This is an appeal against a judgment of the High Court declaring unlawful the demolition of the respondents’ houses in Budiriro 4 in the absence of a court order. More
This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court granting a provisional order in favour of the respondent pursuant to an urgent chamber application filed by the latter. The relevant factual background is as follows More
2. The applicant and the respondent entered into a lease agreement in September 1993 in respect of one of the applicant’s properties, namely, Number 4 Hampshire Road Eastlea, Harare. On 13 March 2007, the applicant wrote a notice of cancellation of the lease, in terms of clause 2 of the lease agreement. It gave the respondent until 30 April, 2007, to vacate the property. More
This is an appeal against the judgment of the Labour Court which upheld the respondent’s appeal against dismissal from employment in terms of the Labour (National Employment Code of Conduct) Regulations S.I.15 of 2006. The court a quo upheld the respondent’s appeal on the basis that the termination of employment of Senior Urban Council employees is exclusively governed by the Urban Councils Act [Chapter 29:15](“the Act”). Having come to that conclusion it proceeded to nullify all prior proceedings leading to the respondent’s dismissal from employment. More
The Appellant approached this court by way of appeal seeking to challenge the decision of the Magistrates Court sitting at Harare on 4 July 2023. The respondent in the court a quo made an application seeking to recover from the Appellant, the sum of US$2 360.00 together with interest at the prescribed rate with effect from 30 July 2022 up to the date of final payment. The application was referred to trial and the respondent was successful in his claim. More
Unfolding events in these two matters must rank on top of what the Supreme Court decried very loudly in Ndebele v Ndebele 1992 (1) ZLR 288 (S) 290 C-E. It stated: More
The appellant Urban Council was arraigned before a Provincial Magistrate sitting at Tredgold on 6th July 2016 on a charge of culpable homicide as defined in section 49 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act (Chapter 9:23). The allegations against the appellant being that on 5th December 2013 and at a tower light along Matshemhlophe Road, opposite Induba Primary School in Iminyela Suburb, Bulawayo, the appellant negligently caused the death of Shepherd Mpala Mgcini who was electrocuted when he came into contact with an unearthed armoured electric cable. Appellant pleaded not guilty to the charge but following a full... More
This is an appeal against the decision of an arbitrator ordering the appellant to reinstate the respondents or alternatively that the respondents be awarded the appropriate damages in lieu of reinstatement. More
What is sought in this application is a combination ofprohibitoryand mandatory interdicts. The applicant seeksto have the respondent restrained from leasing out or otherwise authorising third parties to utilize certain pieces of immovable property situated within its municipal area contending that such use runs contrary to the terms and conditions of a servitude for which the said land was reserved or designated.Secondly it seeks to have the respondent compelled to take positive steps to comply with municipal laws and regulations governing the utilisation of what it calls “servitude stands”. More
1. The honourable arbitrator misdirected himself at law by applying the labour (amendment) act number 5, 2015 to the matter, yet the Labour Amendment Act was not in operation when the cause of action arose.
2. The honourable arbitrator erred at law in his calculations of the back pay and damages in lieu of reinstatement which led him to arrive at a wrong figure which should be due to the respondents.
3. The honourable arbitrator’s award is so unreasonable and irrational in its defiance of logic so as to constitute a ground of appeal in that: More
The appellant appeals in this case against an arbitral award.
Section 98 (10) of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01] (“the Act”) provides as follows:
An appeal on a question of law shall lie to the Labour Court from any decision of an arbitrator appointed in terms of this section. More
This matter was set down as an appeal at the appellant council’s instance. On the set down date and in his heads of argument the respondent argued that the matter was improperly before the court for want of its process not being issued out and filed by a legal practitioner as defined by the Legal Practitioners Act. The applicant opposed the point taken and maintained that it was properly before the court on account of the fact that it was represented by its legal officer who is its employee and who fits within the ambit of who should lawfully issue... More
The respondents are employed by the appellant in different capacities. On 1 December 2014 a letter was written by the Director of Corporate Services and Housing advising the respondents of their transfers. These were lateral transfers.
The respondents raised a grievance on the issue and the matter was eventually referred to an arbitrator. Two terms of reference were given to the arbitrator to determine whether the respondents should be appointed substantively to the position they held in an acting capacity and whether the transfers of the respondents had been procedurally effected. More
This is an appeal against the decision of an Appeals Committee constituted under the Collective Bargaining Agreement for the Harare Municipal Undertaking, Statutory Instrument 17 of 2007 (CBA). More
