This is an application for condonation of late noting of appeal. Applicant was employed as a Dump Truck Operator by respondent. He was dismissed from employment on 24 March 2014 after having been found guilty of stealing diesel and selling it to a third party. On 26 March 2014 he appealed to the Disciplinary and Grievance Committee. On 2 April 2014 the Disciplinary and Grievance Committee confirmed the dismissal and advised the applicant of his appeal rights to this court. In terms of Rule 15 of S.I. 59/2006 applicant had twenty-one days within which to appeal to this Court. The... More
Applicant is the testamentary executor of the estate late Vassilliki Divaris. The late Divaris owned 454,890 shares in respondent bank (“Tetrad”). On 28 June 2023, Tetrad published a notice of an extraordinary general meeting (“EGM”). The EGM was scheduled to take place on 20 July 2023. Its purpose being to procure shareholder approval to change the nature of the company`s business. Tetrad`s directors had resolved to surrender the bank`s licence and set sights on venturing into property and real estate. More
The plaintiff issued summons against the defendant, claiming the following relief:
a) “payment in the sum of US42 000.00 or its lawful Zimbabwean dollar equivalent.
b) Interest thereon at 10% per month calculated from the date of Summons to date of full payment.
c) Collection commission calculated in terms of the Law Society By Laws.
d) An order that the rights held by Defendant in certain immovable property being Stand 22871 Ruwa Township of subdivision of Sebastol held under Deed of Transfer No 4138/20 be declared executable.
e) Costs of suit on an attorney –client scale.” More
The trial of this matter was set down before me with two defendants cited as follows – first defendant was Nyaradzo Catherine Magoge –Mashindi and second defendant as Tango Mining P/L T/A Dinhidza Mine. Second defendant was the former employer of the plaintiffs. The summons was apparently served on persons who had taken over Dinhidza mine from second defendant without being second defendants’ successor in title. As a result an appearance to defend was erroneously entered on the instructions of the persons served with the summons who instructed Mr Muza who has since realised that those that instructed him to... More
The plaintiff and the defendant were married on 9 June 2000 at Harare in terms of the Marriage Act [Chapter 5:11]. Their marriage was blessed with two children, a son aged 20 years and a daughter aged 14 years. Due to irreconcilable differences on 4 April 2017 the plaintiff issued summons out of this court for a decree of divorce and ancillary relief. The Defendant defended the matter and filed a counterclaim.In seeking the dissolution of the marriage the plaintiff alleged that the marriage relationship between the parties has irretrievably broken down to such an extent that there are no... More
This matter was set down for hearing on the opposed roll on 8 June 2022. On that date, respondent had not served applicant with her heads of argument which were said to have been filed on the 25th of January 2022. Applicant therefore raised a preliminary point to the effect that respondent is barred for non-compliance with r59 (20) of SI 202/2021 for failure to serve her heads of argument immediately after filing of the aforesaid heads of argument. More
On 10 February 2021, applicant filed this urgent chamber application seeking relief set out in the draft provisional order as follows:
“TERMS OF FINAL ORDER SOUGHT:
That you show cause to the Honourable Court why a final order should not be made in the following terms-
1. Pending determination of the ordinary application for review which is to be filed within 5 days of the resumption of filing of normal court business.
2. That 3rd and 4th Respondent shall pay costs of suit on the higher scale of attorney and client.
INTERIM RELIEF GRANTED
1. Pending the return date, the... More
Applicant seeks the following interim relief:
“Pending the final determination of this matter the applicant is granted the following interim relief:-
That the first and second respondents and their followers be and are hereby interdicted from conducting church services in properties controlled by the applicant, or interfering with the business and ministry of the applicant.
That the second respondent be and is hereby interdicted from holding himself out as a Bishop of the applicant, and conducting his ministry as such.” More
This is an application for the transfer of Stand number 979 Dulibadzimu, Beitbridge held under Deed of Transfer No. 895/2010 from the first respondent to the applicant and for the second respondent to be ordered to uplift the caveat it had placed on the said property. More
Appellant was employed as a teacher by the Respondent. Following allegations of misconduct, he was brought before a Disciplinary Committee which found him guilty and recommended his dismissal. Appellant is dissatisfied with the decision and has approached this Court for relief. More
CHITAPI J: At the end of hearing of this application on 12 December, 2024 I issued an order as follows
“IT IS ORDERED THAT
1. The respondent is ordered to halt and cease all mining activities along Angwa River until the respondent has obtained the requisite environmental impact certificate and the go ahead to mine in the area by the applicant.
2. Nor order as to costs. More
The second applicant, in his capacity as a director of the first applicant, entered into an agreement of sale of motor vehicles with the first respondent. In terms of this agreement, the first respondent sold to the applicants 7 motor vehicles, mainly steel body tippers, for a total amount of US $ 335 000.00.
Pursuant to the agreement, the applicants made some payments, leaving a balance of US $ 215 000.00. Sometime in July 2021, the second applicant signed an acknowledgement of debt on behalf of the first applicant for the amount of US $215 000.00. The acknowledgment of debt... More
AMBALI vs BATA SHOE COMPANY 1999 (1) ZLR 417 (S)
that a dismissed employee has a duty to mitigate his loss by looking for alternative employment. This duty arises immediately upon dismissal.
It is also an established principle of the law that he who asserts bears the onus of proof. In computation of damages it is the claimant who bears the onus to prove his claim by adducing evidence. More
Applicant filed this application as an Urgent Chamber Application seeking the following order:
(1) That the execution of the eviction ordered under SC 138/21 and allowed to continue under HH 83/22 be allowed pending finalization of the appeal under CV SC 63/22.
(2) That the first respondent pays applicant’s costs of suit on the higher scale of legal practitioner and client. More
[ 1] Applicant seeks the rescission of a judgment entered against it in default in terms of rule 49 of the High Court Rules 2021.According to applicant, the parties` present legal troubles are traceable to the second respondent, Edmore Makureya (“Edmore”). Edmore was applicant`s former (presumably the relationship ended) employee who committed a series of misrepresentations in order to procure goods (on credit) from first respondent. Edmore would place orders with first respondent then collect goods under the guise that he was acting for and on behalf of applicant. Edmore covered his tracks by effecting payment for the goods so... More
