This is an application for a review of the proceedings held before the Respondent. Applicants are seeking an order quashing the proceedings and that fresh proceedings be held before an independent Labour Officer of Arbitrator. At the onset of the proceedings the Respondent’s Counsel raised a point in limine that there was no proper application before me. I dismissed that the application and indicated reasons would follow alongside the main judgment. More
The appellants appeared before the court a quo on initial remand. They face a charge of contravention of s60 A (3) (b) of the Electricity Act (Chapter 13:19). It is alleged that between 30 March and 14 April 2024 at Ngwati Shaft, Zimplats Kadoma, the appellants in the company of two others who were granted bail unlawfully cut 419 metres of armoured copper cables weighing 2 572kgs whose value is US$45 360. It was all recovered. An application for bail pending trial was made. It was opposed by the State. More
is an appeal against the decision of the National Employment Council Appeals Board of the banking undertaking (the appeals board) by the Appellant (the employer). The Respondent noted a cross appeal. These proceedings are to determine both the appeal and the cross appeal.
For ease of reference, the parties will be referred to as the employer and the employee.
The Brief background is that the employee was employed at the Masvingo Branch of the employer as a vault/strong room dual custodian. He was charged with misconduct it being alleged that he had contravened a category ‘D’ clause 11 (1) offence,... More
The applicant was arraigned before a regional court facing a charge of fraud as defined in s 136 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act, [Cap 9:23]. He pleaded not guilty but was convicted as charged. He was sentenced to 4 years imprisonment of which 1 year imprisonment was suspended for 3 years on the usual conditions of good behaviour and a further 2 years suspended on condition he made restitution to the complainant in the amount of US$65 000 on or before 31 March, 2011. He thus would serve an effective 1 year imprisonment. More
This matter was placed before this court in terms of Order 32 r 5 (5) of the Magistrates Court (Civil) Rules, 2019 (the Rules). It is a spin-off from a matter that was determined by the court a quo, in which the applicant herein was the defendant and the first respondent herein was plaintiff. The matter concerned some claims that were made by the first respondent against the applicant in the court a quo, in connection with a lease agreement that subsisted between the parties. The court found in favour of the first respondent and ordered the applicant to pay... More
This court reserved judgment on point in limine and merits on the
16 September 2013 after the respondent through its lawyers Mr A Mugandiwa had raised a point in limine. The respondent submitted that the grounds of appeal that the appellant had raised were of fact and not law. On the other hand the appellant told the court that the issues that had been raised were points of law and that this court had to deal with the merits of the appeal. More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award in favour of the Respondent. Respondent was employed by the Appellant as a Site Quantity Surveyor on 17th February 2012. It is alleged the Respondent stopped going to work in March 2013. In June 2013 he reported for work and demanded his salary. Appellant contended that Respondent had repudiated his contract of employment by failing to report to work. On 6th June 2013 Respondent’s contract of employment was terminated. More
the 25th of August 2021, I dismissed the appeals lodged by the appellants in this case against refusal of bail. My finding was that there was no misdirection on the part of the court a quo. The appellants have requested reasons for the dismissal of their appeal.
Background Facts
The appellants were arraigned before Mbare magistrates court facing a charge of unlawful entry into premises in aggravating circumstances as defined in s 131 (a) the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23] as read with s 131 (2) (e ) of the said Act.
It was alleged that on... More
This is an urgent chamber application. The applicant applies to stay execution of certain property belonging to the Estate Late James Robert Dambaza Chikerema (“Estate Late James Chikerema”) attached by the second respondent at the instance of the first respondent. The applicant is the executrix dative of the Estate Late James Chikerema. The first respondent is the executrix dative of the Estate Late Charles Kufahakurotwe Chikerema (“Estate Late Charles Chikerema”). She is thoroughly ill-advised. She is flogging a horse that has been dead more than twenty years ago. This sort of thing happens if lawyers abdicate their responsibilities and begin... More
The plaintiff and defendant are husband and wife. The parties were married on 2 September 2000. They were blessed with three children, O, F and A, all of whom are still minors. Certain unhappy differences have arisen in the marriage and the plaintiff has instituted this action for divorce. Pre-trial conferences which were held before this trial, resulted in the execution of a joint pre-trial conference minute in which it is recorded that the parties are agreed that their marriage has irretrievably broken down to the extent that there are no prospects of the restoration of a normal marriage relationship... More
On 17 July 2016 this Court issued an Order pursuant to an application for quantification by the Applicant. The Respondent has requested for reasons for the order. It is my sincere hope that the request has been made in earnest as this matter has been pending finalisation for a very long time indeed. More
: The plaintiff issued summons claiming a decree of divorce and ancillary relief. The claim was opposed. The parties contracted a civil marriage under the then Marriage Act [ Chapter 5:11] at Harare on 2 September 1995. The court’s jurisdiction is premised on the fact that the defendant is a Zimbabwean citizen who is domiciled in Zimbabwe. More
The see-saw which characterizes the case of the applicant and that of the respondent is unprecedented. It is unprecedented in the sense that it appears to have little, if any, end-in-sight. Indeed, its characteristics fall into the realms of the court’s dictum which is to the effect that there should be finality to litigation. More
In this opposed application a maternal grandmother seeksaccess rights to her grandchild. The minor child at the centre of the dispute resides with his paternal grandparents while attending school and resides with the father on holidays and weekends. The mother to the minor child is resident in Mozambique and is not one of the parties involved in the application.The minor child central to the dispute is Nathaniel Siyaka Tabaniewho was born on 18 October 2011 (hereinafter called the minor child).The applicant is the minor child’s maternal grandmother. First respondent is the minor child’s biologicalfather. Second andthird respondents are the minor... More
On the 25th October 2013 this Court delivered a judgment allowing an appeal against an arbitral award which was in favour of the applicant.
Aggrieved by the judgment, Applicant then filed this application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. In terms of Section 92F (1) of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01] appeals to the Supreme Court against a Labour Court decision shall be premised on a question of law. More
