By an award dated the 28th February, 2014, the Arbitrator found that Respondent had been unfairly dismissed and ordered that she be reinstated to her position without loss of salary and benefits. In the event of reinstatement not being possible, Respondent was to be paid damages. More
Applicant is claiming from respondent payment of $255 689 400 for goods delivered to respondent. Applicant has averred that on 30 August 2005, following telephonic communication with one Bernard, respondent’s employee, it provided a quotation for 200 rolls of thermal shelf talkers and 1000 rolls of thermal computer labels. Orders were placed by the respondent as per the quotation. The 200 rolls of thermal shelf talkers and 1000 rolls of thermal computer labels were duly delivered to respondent on 5 September 2005 and received by the respondent’s employees. On 6 September 2005, a Mr Alan Pirie, the general manager of... More
On the 16th December 2022 at Harare Designated Agent G. Mudzengi issued a determination. He ordered appellant (employer) to reinstate respondent (employee) or pay her damages for loss of
employment. The employer then appealed the determination to this Court in terms of section 92D of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01. More
CHITAKUNYE AJA: This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court (“the court a quo”) handed down on 15 June 2011wherein the court a quo granted an application for a declaratur that the saleand transfer of Stand 382 Good Hope Township to the appellant was null and void. More
The present judgment was prepared in 2018. There has been a delay in its handdown. l tender my most sincere apologies to the parties.
This is an appeal against a determination of the Appeals Committee handed down on 9th of January, 2013 in which the Appeals Committee ruled that there was no relationship between the then highest worker grade (grade 9) and the newly introduced grade 13. The Appeals Committee also found that the Appellant’s salary was not reduced by reason of the evaluation exercise and therefore there was no unfair labour practice. More
The plaintiffs issued summons out of this court on 2 October 2009 seeking the following relief:
“1. That the first defendant is according to the law and prevailing principles of succession of
the chieftainship in the Wanyama (Hata) clan hereby declared unfit, illegitimate and
unsuitable to preside over theWanyama (Hata) community as chief.
2. Additionally or alternatively the process leading to the second defendant’s submission of
the first defendant’s name to third and fourth defendants for appointment be and is hereby
declared to be contrary to law and the prevailing principles of succession of the Wanyama
(Hata) clan.
3. The... More
The appellant was on his own plea of guilty convicted of contravening s 156(1)(c) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act, [Cap 9:23], unlawful dealing in dangerous drugs. He was sentenced to 48 months imprisonment of which 12 months imprisonment was suspended on condition of good behaviour. More
The applicants were both arraigned before the magistrates court facing 1 count of armed robbery as defined in section 126 of The Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]. It is alleged that on 23 February 2021 at Mukahwi Store, Dorapindo, Zimunya, Mutare both accused approached the complainant while driving a Mazda 323 silver in colour with no number plates. The second applicant produced a pistol from the handbag ordering the complainant to remain silent. At the same time the second applicant packed grocery items they had demanded from the complainant. The grocery items were loaded into the two... More
This is an application in terms of section 14 of the High Court Act, Chapter 7:06 seeking a declaratory order in the following terms;
“1. The application is hereby granted.
2. It is hereby declared that the partnership agreement entered into by and between the parties authorizing applicant and 2nd respondent to use 1st respondent’s
company credentials is valid and binding.
3. 1st respondent shall pay costs of suit at the legal practitioner and client scale.” More
This is an appeal against the entire judgment of the High Court dated 4 September 2019, in which the court a quogranted a declaratur and consequential relief sought by the respondents against the appellants and dismissed the application for a declaratur sought by the appellants against the respondents More
This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court (“the court a quo”) in which an order for a mandamus van spolie was granted in favour of the respondent. This Court does not find merit in this appeal and it must be dismissed. I outline hereunder the reasons for this decision. More
The applicant is deputy president in the first respondent, a pentecostal church. He filed this application through the urgent chamber book. He did so on 3 August, 2018. He couched his draft order in the following terms:
“1. 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:
1. No writ or execution of the order obtained in the High Court held at Harare under case No. HC 4756/18 will be issued or actioned by the respondents during the pendency of the application for... More
This is an opposed urgent application seeking an order for an interdict in the following terms:
“TERMS OF THE FINAL ORDER SOUGHT:
That you must show cause to this Honourable court why a final order should not be made in the following terms;
1. The 1st respondent its privies, agents and/or employees be and hereby interdicted from interfering with or dealing with the 3000 tonnes of gold dump, 1800 tonnes of gold sand, the mill shed, fence and borehole pump located at the mining site known as Whatcheeer INVAR C 14322 pending resolution of the summons matter under case number... More
The applicant approached this court on a certificate of urgency for a provisional order in terms of which are the following:
“TERMS OF THE FINAL ORDER SOUGHT
1. A writ of execution sued out by the 1st to 6th respondents against applicant pursuant to the court order granted in case number HC 7774/15 be and is hereby permanently stayed.
2. The 1st to 6th respondent to pay costs. More
