The appellant, Mr Muzavazi (Muzavazi) is employed by the respondent as a Finance Manager. He was charged with violating s 4 (a) of the National Code of Conduct Statutory Instrument 15/06 (S.I. 15/06) that is, an act of conduct or omission inconsistent with the fulfilment of the express or implied conditions of his contract. More
On 29 March 2008, the harmonised presidential, parliamentary and council elections were held in Zimbabwe. The petitioner stood as the candidate for the Movement for Democratic Change “MDC” for the Local Council seat in respect Ward 21 in the constituency of Mount Darwin West. The respondent represented the Zimbabwe African National Union [Patriotic Front}”ZANU PF” in that Ward. On 30 March, 2008 the respondent was declared the winner of that seat. More
This is an appeal against the decision of an arbitrator. The appellants were employed by the respondent on fixed term contracts. The appellants’ contracts were terminated by the respondent. A dispute arose in respect of the appellants’ entitlements in terms of the contracts of employment. The matter ended up in arbitration. The arbitrator dismissed the appellants’ claims. The appellants are dissatisfied with the award and have approached this court for relief. More
This was a civil appeal from the magistrate’s court. We heard it on 26 June 2019 and reserved judgment. Regrettably, judgment could not be delivered soon enough. For much of the first term vacation and part of the second term I was indisposed. This now is the appeal judgment More
Proceedings in this matter were instituted by way of a Notice of Appeal. The original copy is filed of record. It was date-stamped on 24th February 2014. It has a space for the signature of the person noting the appeal. It is common cause that the person who signed on that space is Ms P. Beta who appeared in this Court as the representative of the Appellants. She works for the Appellants’ trade union that is Detergents, Edible Oils and Fats Workers Union. In terms of section 92 (b) of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01] (thereafter called the Act) a... More
US$53 820 (Fifty-three thousand eight hundred and twenty united state dollars) is a substantial sum of money, whichever way one looks at it. It is a sum that has the potential of unlocking many possibilities. Defrauding a supposed business partner of that sum of money almost invariablyinvites upon the offender a deserved stint in gaol. The appellant in the present matter, however simplycannot stomach such a prospect. This is despite having candidly admittedhaving employed guile and deception to defraud the complainant of the said sum of money in cash. On the 10th of November we delivered an ex-tempore judgment in... More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award.
The appellant was employed by the respondent as an early childhood development (ECD) teacher on 7 February 2005, on a contract without limit of time.
The respondent, whose operations are regulated by the Ministry of Education Sport and Culture (as it was then), received a Circular No 12 of 2005 in August 2005 which set the need for establishment of standards to be met in the provision of early childhood development by schools. More
This is an urgent chamber application. The interim relief sought is for the immediate liberation of the second applicant from the Harare Remand Prison on the basis that his detention is unlawful. More
The applicant was employed by the 1st respondent as a finance and administration officer. She was initially unprocedurally dismissed on the 25th of July 2014 without being properly charged nor a hearing having been conducted.
On the 1st of August 2014, the applicant lodged a complaint of unfair dismissal with the Labour Office. Inexplicably this first complaint was not allocated to a labour officer. The applicant lodged a fresh complaint on the 5th of November 2015. The issues raised were unfair dismissal and unfair labour practice relating to the alleged failure by the 1st respondent to pay the full salary,... More
The application hinges on a dispute pitting two related deceased estates as will be revealed from the brief history of the matter. The applicant approached the court seeking an order that farm 119 Zowa Zvimba (hereafter referred as to as the farm) is an undistributed asset of late estate John Hwata DR704/92. The applicant argued that the farm did not at any point devolve to the estate of late Enos Hwata and thus it should be inherited and administered by the applicant who is the surviving spouse of the estate late John Hwata. The first respondent in opposition argued that... More
This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the Labour Court delivered on 23 February 2018 which dismissed, with costs, an appeal by the appellant against an arbitral award issued on 8 February 2010. More
