It is not in dispute that applicant owns a piece of land in Whitecliff which land falls under the jurisdiction of the respondent as the local authority. In 1998 applicant was issued with a permit in terms of the Regional, Town and Country Planning Act, [Chapter 29:12] to subdivide Whitecliff into residential stands. More
On 13 March, 2017 I perused the documents filed of record, heard counsel and delivered an ex tempo judgment. It read:
“IT BE AND IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. The first and second respondents shall, within ten days of service of this order, provide the third respondent with sufficient police manpower and equipment to maintain the peace while the third respondent enforces the writ of ejectment in case number SC 45/12.
2. The first and second respondents shall pay costs of suit. [emphasis added]” More
The matter was placed before me as an application for quantification of damages. Although the matter was initially set down for the 26th March, 2012 the matter was postponed for at least four occasions to allow for negotiations with a view to an out of court settlement of the case. On the last date of hearing i.e. 16 October, 2013 the applicant was directed to place before the court proof of his claims for medical aid and school fees. The proof was to be tendered at the latest by the 25th of October, 2013. The respondent was also granted leave... More
This is an application for condonation of late filing of an appeal by Chidhuza (the applicant).
The requirements which an applicant has to satisfy in such applications have been clearly stated in numerous cases. These are:-
- The degree of non-compliance;
- The explanation for the non-compliance;
- The importance of the case
- The prospects of success in the main matter;
- Interest in the finality of the case;
- The convenience to the Court and respondent. More
On 12 October 2023 we delivered an ex tempore judgment dismissing the appellant’s appeal and upholding the respondent’s cross appeal with costs. The following are the full reasons informing that decision. We supply them at the instance of the appellant who has since made a written request for the same. More
On 30 November 2011, and after hearing viva voce evidence from the plaintiff and considering the fairly detailed submissions made by the plaintiff’s counsel I granted the following order: More
This is an appeal against the determination of the respondent’s Appeals Committee issued on 11 April 2019, which upheld the appellant’s dismissal from employment. More
On 12 November, 2010, the Applicant won an appeal against his dismissal in this Court. The order per President Musariri was as follows;
“1.The appeal is hereby allowed and dismissal of Appellant by Respondent is set aside;
2. Respondent shall conduct fresh disciplinary hearing before a new disciplinary committee and conclude same within thirty (30) days of this order failing which,
a) Respondent shall reinstate Appellant without loss of salary and benefits, or
b) Respondent shall pay Appellant damages for loss of employment in a sum either agreed by the parties or assessed by this court.” More
This is an application for review.
The applicant who was employed by the respondent as a general manager at its business site in Mozambique was on 21 July 2015 advised that the employer had decided to terminate his contract of employment on notice. More
The Applicant in this matter seeks an interim order restraining the respondents from disposing of or transferring certain immovable property, known as Katamon Court, in Harare. The applicant also seeks a final order effectively transferring the said property into its name and ownership through the execution of a share subscription agreement.
In support of its claim, the applicant avers that the parties concluded a binding oral agreement in February 2005 for the sale of the property at the purchase price of $6 billion. The 1st and 2nd respondents deny any such binding agreement and dispute the applicant’s right to acquire... More
This is an appeal against an award of the Arbitrator Honourable Viriri handed down on the 19th of May 2016. The appeal is brought in accordance with Section 98(10) of the Labour Act (Chapter 28:01). More
Applicant applied for the review of Respondent’s decision to terminate her employment on notice. She prayed that the decision be set aside. Respondent opposed the application. In due course the matter was set down for hearing. At the onset of oral argument Respondent raised 2 points in limine. I shall deal with the 2nd point which I consider as dispositive of the matter More
This is an appeal against the magistrate’s ruling sitting at Kadoma dismissing the appellant’s application for rescission of judgment on 15 December 2008.
The respondent Farai Ngorima is the registered owner of a certain piece of immovable property known as house number 3795 Ingezi Township Kadoma. He purchased the house from the late Monica Ruvimbo Dzinamarira on 7 March 2007 for $27 000 000-00. The property was registered in his name on 17 April 2007 under deed of transfer 000198/007 with the seller acknowledging that the whole of the purchase price had been paid. More
