The applicant seeks a declaration of invalidity in respect of additional income tax assessments for the tax years ended 2019 and 2020. It also seeks another declaration of invalidity of the additional value added tax [VAT] assessments issued against it by the respondent for the period March 2019 to October 2021. It claims costs of suit on an attorney and client scale against the respondent. More
Delta Beverages Private Limited (plaintiff) sued all the three defendants claiming the sum of US$33 876.72 being the amount due and owing by the defendants to the plaintiff in respect of the balance of the costs of goods namely beverages supplied on credit to first and second defendants during the period extending from the 11th February 2009 to 9th June 2014 and for which the first and second defendants on the 30th December 2013 acknowledged themselves to be truly and lawfully indebted to the plaintiff as at that date in the total sum of US$22 107. The third defendant bound... More
is an appeal at the instance of the appellant employer against the decision of the arbitrator where he ruled that the appellant casualised labour by employing the respondent for a stretch of nine years on renewable fixed term contracts. More
This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court (the court a quo) dated 25 October 2023 in which it dismissed the appellant’s application for a declaratur. More
The plaintiff issued summons against the defendant for specific performance. It sought payment of ZWL$ 28 140.03, interest at the prescribed rate plus costs of suit. In its declaration, the plaintiff averred that it entered into a contract for the provision of security guard services with the defendant for the period 1st of January to the 30th of September 2022. These services were to be provided at three of the defendant’s catchment areas. Payment for such services was to be made on a monthly basis upon furnishing of an invoice. The plaintiff’s invoices totalled ZWL$47 344. 619.61. Of this amount,... More
This is an application for absolution from the instance which was made after the first defendant, which is the plaintiff in the counterclaim, closed its case. For convenience, the parties will be referred to as they appear in the pleadings filed of record. More
The plaintiff brought a claim against the defendant for payment of $17 420-71 for goods sold and delivered to the defendant for period ending March 2015. The plaintiff claimed interest at 18% per annum and an order declaring stand 7923 Tynwald Township of stand 7739 Tynwald Township held under Deed of Transfer number 1489/2009 especially executable. The plaintiff also sought costs on a higher scale and collection commission. More
In this court application the applicant seeks an order in the following terms;
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. The application be and is hereby granted.
2. The agreement of sale entered into by and between the applicant and the first respondent dated 3 September 2013 in respect of immovable property subdivision called stand 18102 Ruwa measuring 34 895 square metres situate in the District of Goromonzi be and is hereby declared and confirmed as valid, binding and enforceable. More
This is an application for condonation of late filing of an application for rescission of a default judgment entered against the applicant. The detailed facts are as set out in the applicant’s founding affidavit and, because of the attitude that I have taken in this case, I do not wish to regurgitate them. Suffice it to say the key facts are briefly as follows: More
The applicant and first respondent are former spouses. The parties were married under customary law in 1996. Their marriage was blessed with two children but was apparently not registered. Their customary law union was purportedly dissolved in the Magistrates Court on 28 October 2010. The presiding magistrate in dissolving the customary law union indicated that as the value of the Property in question exceeded her monetary jurisdiction, she could not deal with the issue of the distribution of the immovable property. More
The applicant is a company duly registered in Zimbabwe. It is a vendor for the design, configuration and commissioning of pre-payment metering technology (PMT) used in the buying and selling of electricity tokens in 13 Southern African countries. The first respondent is a body corporate established in terms of s 5 of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act [Chapter 22:23] (the Act). It is mandated by s 54 (10) (c) as read with s 96 of the Act to, inter alia, investigate anomalies that may arise in public procurement in Zimbabwe. The second respondent is a company... More
The facts of this matter can be summarised as follows. In 2012, the applicant was awarded a tender by the 2nd respondent for the design, configuration and commissioning of a pre-payment, vending and management system. This system is the one used in Zimbabwe for the electricity tokens for prepaid meters. The system was upgraded in April 2022. It came as a surprise to the applicant that the 2nd respondent decided to embark on a competitive bidding process to procure a similar platform as the current one in view of the upgrade. Such procurement is in breach of the PPDAA, which... More
This is an appeal by the Appellant against dismissal from the Respondent’s employ. Before merits of the appeal could be heard, Ms Maposa who appeared on behalf of the Respondent raised a point in limine.
Ms Maposa contended that the grounds brought by the Appellant should have been by way of review and not by appeal. This is so because Ms Maposa continued, the grounds raise procedural issues and not the substantive correctness or otherwise of the decision being appealed against. It was also averred on behalf of the Respondent that the grounds of appeal are vague. Mr Chimutashu who... More
This matter has a sad history of dragging back and forth since 2014 with the parties engaged in a series of applications and counter applications but the merits of the matter not being dealt with.
Finally on 17 March 2015 the parties agreed that they had haggled over the matter for long enough and now wanted finality of the matter on the merits. This led to the parties submitting on the merits of the appeal at employee’s instance which is the main matter on the case. Judgment was reserved from 23 March 2015 a date which parties agreed they would... More
