In this urgent chamber application the applicant, established in January 2006 to represent and coordinate companies in the cotton industry in Zimbabwe, seeks a provisional order against the first respondent in the following terms:
“TERMS OF THE FINAL ORDER SOUGHT
1. The first respondent is hereby interdicted from purchasing any contracted seed cotton from growers contracted to the applicant’s members.
2. The first respondent is interdicted from purchasing or taking delivery of any seed cotton packed in cotton packs bearing the logo or name or acronym of the applicant’s members.
3. The first respondent is ordered to render an account... More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award in favour of the Respondents. The Respondents were employed by Myramah Farming (Pvt) Ltd t/a Cottzim from September 2009 to September 2012. Respondents’ services were terminated. They approached the Labour Officer for conciliation on a dispute of unlawful termination by Cottzim. The parties reached an agreement but Appellant reneged on it. The matter was referred to arbitration. The Arbitrator put the terms of the agreement before the Labour Officer as the award. More
This application as I will demonstrate below has a checked history and was punctuated by episodes of drama. On the 17th May 2017 in Case Number HC 3855/17 this court granted an interim interdict in favour of the applicant Country Club Twenty-Ten (Private ) Limited. Dissatisfied by the Interim Order the respondents filed a Notice of Appeal in the Supreme Court on the 29th May 2017 in Case Number SC 325/17. The appeal is still pending. More
On 28 September 2010 the applicant and the first respondent entered into a Management Agreement. In terms of the Agreement the first respondent appointed the applicant as the executive management of the Club for fifty years enduring until the 30th of September 2060. More
The appellant appeals against the determination of an arbitrator which ordered it to pay salary arrears in the sum of $221 646.50 in 9 instalments of $24 627.39 per month.
All the respondents were employed by the appellant. It is not in dispute that the respondents did not receive their salaries for sometime when the appellant experienced financial challenges. At times they were underpaid. The respondents filed a claim for the recovery of the money with a labour officer. When conciliation efforts failed the matter was referred to arbitration. The arbitrator made a finding set out in the first paragraph... More
On 1 September 2004, one C A. Banda, acting as an arbitrator between the above parties, made available his award in which he upheld the agreement of sale and construction between the parties. In his award, he ordered the applicants to transfer certain piece of land to the respondent and to complete the construction of developments on the piece of land as per the agreement. More
After his trial on 9 June 2014 and at Mbare Magistrates Court, the appellant was convicted of theft in contravention of s 113 (2) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23] and sentenced to 30 months imprisonment of which 12 months imprisonment were suspended for 5 years on condition of future good conduct with the remaining 18 months being suspended on condition of restitution. More
On the 28th September, 2018 applicant filed an application with this Court citing Section 12B (3) of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01] (THE ACT) seeking a declaration, declaring his resignation an act of constructive dismissal by respondent More
The first and second applicants are members of the third applicant, an unincorporated association. The third applicant approached the court in terms of Order 2A of the High Court Rules, which recognizes its status as such. The first respondent is an administrative body tasked with providing services for residence of Harare. It is established in terms of the Urban Councils Act . One of its major functions is the regulation of the disposal of land that falls under its jurisdiction. In casu, it stands accused by the applicants of surreptitiously selling a piece of land to the second respondent. It... More
In March 2009, the applicant approached this court on a certificate of urgency and obtained a provisional order calling upon the respondents to show cause why they should not be ordered to release certain items of household goods and effects whose details were listed in an annexure to the application. As interim relief the second respondent was ordered not to sell or dispose of any of the property on the schedule. The second respondent was also restrained from releasing any of the property to anyone other than the applicant. More
Before the matter proceeded into the merits, a preliminary point was raised on behalf of the respondent. It was submitted that the appeal was filed out of the prescribed period and therefore improperly before the court.
For the respondent it was submitted that the appeal was against a determination of 27 November 2013. The appeal before the court was filed on 8 July 2015. The background to this case was given as follows:
The appellant and respondents had a labour dispute. The matter was eventually placed before the General Engineering Committee of the National Employment Council for the Engineering and... More
The applicant is a company duly incorporated according to the laws of Zimbabwe. It specializes in electronics, solar and gas appliances. First, second and third respondents are ex-employees of the applicant. Upon leaving employment, first and second respondents founded the fourth respondent, whose line of business is more or less similar to that of the applicant. Fourth respondent was incorporated according to the laws of Zimbabwe. The applicant accuses respondents of certain business malpractices that it finds synonymous with unlawful competition and therefore a threat to its own business. For that reason, it approached this court seeking an interdict against... More
At the onset of oral argument in this Court respondent raised points in limine,
The points are set out in its opposing affidavit thus,
“Point in Limine
a.Defective Notice of Appeal
The Respondent submits that there is no Notice of Appeal before the Honourable court for want of non-compliance (sic) with the Rules of this Court.
The Labour Court Rules, SI 150/2017 clearly stipulates that the Notice of Appeal should be in Form LC 4 and this Form LC 4 is clearly provided for
The Appellant in clear contravention of the Rules of Court, went on to manufacture his own... More
This application initially came as an application for a provisional order for the company’s voluntary winding up. A provisional liquidation order was granted on 22 June 2011. On 27 July 2011 the respondent filed its notice of opposition. The matter is here today for the confirmation of the provisional liquidation order granted on the 22nd of June 2011. More
The plaintiff claims a total sum US$14,875 being the balance due in respect of two batches of broiler chicks delivered to the defendant in October 2008 and February 2009. The defendant disputes the principal claim on several grounds and counterclaims damages in reconvention for the payment of US$9,331 in addition to set-off of the total amount claimed by the plaintiff More
