The defendant was employed by Dairiboard Zimbabwe Limited. On 1st January 1998 he was seconded to the plaintiff as a Finance Manager and Company Secretary for a period of two years, subject to annual review by the plaintiff’s managing director. Apart from the question of remuneration due to the defendant, the contract of assignment also provided for the defendant to be provided with a vehicle as part of his remuneration package with the plaintiff. The plaintiff has now instituted proceedings against the defendant for the recovery of monies it states are due in respect of that vehicle. The parties agreed... More
This is an application for rescission of a judgment that was granted by this court on 17 September 2012. The judgment was granted in favour of the respondent after applicant failed to file its Heads of Argument within the time limit required by the Labour Court Rules. More
The respondent, Comfort HR Strategies (Comfort) sued the applicant, Dairibord Zimbabwe (Private) Limited (Dairibord) under case number HC 2591/20 for the refund of USD110 000.00 a claim based on unjust enrichment. Comfort is a company registered in terms of the laws of South Africa. According to Comfort ’s declaration, there was a verbal agreement between the parties in October 2018 the material terms of which were that Comfort would pay, on behalf of Dairibord, to Dairibord’s foreign suppliers for the purchase of certain input materials. It was agreed that Comfort will pay a total sum of USD500 000.00 to Dairibord’s... More
“I make bold to say that it is not just for the sake of poetry that the old adage, context is everything, holds true. In so many scenarios, words alone ring hollow. Context gives life and meaning to what is said or written. Is a court of law then entitled, or required, to take cognisance of context when interpreting a contract? That is the question that this Court is
called upon to answer.”- Constitutional Court of South Africa. More
The respondent was employed on a fixed term contract basis by the appellant.
The appellant was arrested by the police in relation to some criminal charges. He stopped reporting for duty as a consequence of his arrest.
The contract of employment which was a fixed term contract expired and the appellant did not renew it.
When the respondent eventually reported for duty, he argued that the employer had unlawfully terminated his contract of employment as he had a legitimate expectation to have his contract renewed and further the employer had employed someone in his stead. More
The first applicant, a duly registered company, is the holder of copper mining rights for the mining claims known as Gubudu 1-3 whose registration numbers are set out above. The second applicant claims to be the majority shareholder with 66% shareholding in the first applicant. The respondent is said to be the biological elder brother of Baoming Huang, the minority shareholder who holds 34% shares in the first applicant. There is a pending shareholding and directorship dispute between the parties under case numbers HC 2480/20 and HC 2492/20, amongst others. It is also submitted that there has been no mining... More
The brief history of this matter is that the respondent was employed as a chief security officer from August 2008 to 13 August 2015. He was suspended and dismissed from work on charges of misconduct. It is alleged that he failed to control illegal panning and it was alleged that he also failed to execute his major duty of safeguarding the company assets by allowing illegal panning.
The respondent appealed to the arbitrator alleging unfair dismissal. More
This is an appeal against the determination, handed down in terms of Section 63 (3a) of the Labour Act [Cap 28:01] (hereafter referred to as the Act) by the Designated Agent of the National Employment Council for the Mining Industry, Mr V. Tasiyana. The determination was handed down on 14 March 2022. More
The applicant in this matter was arrested and charged with the crime of Contravening Section 45 (1) (b) as read with section 128 (1) (b) of the Parks and Wildlife Act, Chapter 20:14 “Unlawful Possession of Pangolin Trophy Scales”.
It is alleged that on 11 November 2018, and at Chininga area, along Binga-Siabuwa Road, the appellant unlawfully and intentionally had in his possession, 71 pangolin trophy scales weighing 400 grames, without a valid permit issued in terms thereby contravening the Act. More
The plaintiff issued out summons against the defendants claiming the following relief:
An order declaring the plaintiff a statutory tenant and nullifying the notice of the termination of the lease agreement served by the 1st defendant through the 2nd defendant.
Payment of the sum of US$14 000 or ZWL equivalent as at date of full and final payment being the amount paid to ZESA by the plaintiff clearing electricity bill which 1st defendant should have paid with interest at the prescribed rate of interest from 2014 to date of final settlement. More
On 12 June 2012 the appellant appeared at Rotten Row Magistrate Court, Harare facing two counts of fraud as defined by s 136 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act1. Upon conviction the appellant was sentenced to 15 months imprisonment of which 7 months were suspended for 5 years on condition of future good conduct. More
This matter was listed for trial. The first defendant pleaded prescription of the plaintiff’s claim and prayed that the lis against him should be demanded with costs on that score. The plaintiff has pleaded that the lis has not prescribed contrary to the first defendant’s claim in that regard. It is trite that the determination of prescription as a special plea is a trial matter. It is unlike other dilatory points in limine which are determined on the pleadings filed, in short, on the records four corners without the need to consider extraneous evidence. The procedural law relating to prescription... More
This application was initially filed at the Harare High Court on the 9th June 2020. The parties appeared before KWENDA J who issued the following order:
“It is ordered that:
1. The Registrar shall immediately transfer this matter to be heard at the Bulawayo High Court.
2. No order as to costs for this postponement.” More
The applicant is employed by the respondent as its Chief Executive Officer from 2014.
Disciplinary proceedings were commenced against applicant on 25 February 2020 as a result of which the applicant was suspended pending disciplinary proceedings. He is, in these proceedings challenging the manner in which he was suspended and the
employer’s decision to institute disciplinary proceedings against him. The applicant prays for reinstatement without loss of salary and benefits. More
