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
This is an appeal against a determination by an arbitrator. In order for such an appeal to be properly before the Court,issues of law only must be raised as provided for in Section 98(10) of the Labour Act [Cap 28:01] (The Act). More
The application before the court is for bail pending appeal against sentence. The State opposed the application and the court to a greater extend agreed with the State and thus dismissed the application. More
The applicant seeks an order for the eviction of the respondent and all those occupying through her from a certain piece of land situate in Harare known as Stand 17788 of Harare Township of Salisbury, otherwise known as number 17788 Watermeyer Road, Belvedere, Harare (the property).
The applicant is the registered owner of the property as more fully attested to by the Deed of Transfer registered in its name under DT 2882/17. The applicant claims that the respondent is in occupation of the property unlawfully, without its permission. The applicant wants her out of the property. The respondent has not... More
The brief history of this matter is that the respondent was employed as a Senior Accounts Clerk based at Mutawatawa Depot. His duties involved overseeing the stores section at the Depot. In March 2013 the appellant received information to the effect that the respondent was selling the appellant’s diesel to the public without the appellant’s management authority. In April 2013 the respondent was charged with gross misconduct. He was found guilty and dismissed from employment with effect from 11 April 2013. More
The claim in this matter was filed against the first defendant in March 2005. Trial commenced in October 2008 and has spanned over some 18 months. The cumulative delay between the time of the filing of the summons and the handing down of judgment is a record five years. The telling point though is that there is no letter of complaint from the plaintiff over the time it has taken to get this matter finalized. More
Applicant applied to this Court for condonation of a belated Response. Respondent opposed the applicant.
The basis of the application is set out in applicant’s founding affidavit More
