It is not sufficient for the state to make bold assertions that particular grounds for refusing bail exist. The assertions made by the state must be well grounded on the facts. Simply alleging that the accused may abscond, that the matter is serious, and that the accused may endanger the public or will interfere with witnesses without substantiating such allegations does not meet the threshold of compelling reasons for the denial of bail. The facts alleged in the Request for Remand Form 242 or the charge sheet must disclose a link between the accused and the alleged offence. Where several... More
What started as an ordinary maize growing contract which the applicant and the first respondent signed developed into a bruising legal battle between them. They signed it on 30 September, 2013. They earmarked it for the 2013/2014 farming season.
In terms of the contract, the first respondent advanced inputs and cash to the applicant. It advanced the equivalent of $147 627.44 in cash and kind.
The advanced inputs and money aimed at enabling the applicant to grow and deliver to the first respondent 650 metric tonnes of maize. This was to be delivered on or before 31 July, 2014. The... More
The phrase “the Magistrates’ Court is a creature of statute”has almost become a cliché in discourse on the hierarchy and jurisdiction of courts. The same holds true for the expression “the powers of the Magistrates Court are located within the four corners of the statute creating it”. These expressions aptly capture the fact that unlike the High Court which enjoys inherent (unlimited) jurisdiction (save in instances where such jurisdiction is otherwise ousted or limited by an Act of Parliament) the powers of the Magistrate Court are only to be exercised within the parameters of the Magistrates Court Act, [Chapter 7:10](or... More
This is an application by a designated agent. It is an application for the confirmation of the designated agent’s ruling. It is in terms of section 93 (5a) (a) and (b) of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01 (the Act). The application is by default, not opposed by the first respondent who is the employer. More
This is an application for the review of the Master’s decision of 3 September 2004 in which he approved the award of house number 1242 Unit A Chitungwiza (the immovable property) by Joshua Songore to Josiah Gweme. Josiah Gweme (the first respondent) counterclaimed for the eviction of the applicant from the immovable property. More
1. The applicant brought an application in terms of s 236(4) (b) of the High Court Rules, 1971, (the Rules). She seeks an order for dismissal of the respondent’s case on the premise that he failed to pursue an application he filed by neglecting to set it for hearing entitling her to apply for dismissal for want of prosecution.
2. Rule 236(4) stipulates as follows;
“(4) Where the applicant has filed an answering affidavit in response to the respondent’s opposing affidavit but has not, within a month thereafter, set the matter down for hearing, the respondent, on notice to the... More
This is an appeal against the decision of the N. E. Appeals Committee which upheld the Appellant’s dismissal by the Respondent on gross misconduct charges of failing to obey a lawful instruction in contravention of the National Employment Code of Conduct for Welfare and Educational Institutions. More
The applicant is Edson Dylka E Neurice Limitada a peregrine company domiciled and incorporated in Mozambique. It is in the business of transporting goods within and across neighbouring countries including Zimbabwe. The respondent is Zimbabwe Revenue Authority statutory corporate body established under the Revenue Authority Act, [Chapter 23:11]. The respondent inter-alia is responsible for revenue collection on behalf of Government and is also the regulatory authority for the exportation and importation of goods at the country’s borders. The respondent also administers and enforces the Customs and Exercise Act, [Chapter 23:02] (“the Act”). More
This is an appeal purportedly brought in terms of section 361 of the Mines and Minerals Act, [Chapter 21:05] ("the act") against the refusal of the 1st respondent (the Mining Commissioner) to grant the appellant a certificate of registration under an ordinary prospecting licence. More
: It is an ambitious claim. On 9 April 2010 the plaintiff issued summons in this Court seeking delivery of ten tobacco bulk curers and a payment of US$191 250-00 being damages caused by the alleged failure to deliver the tobacco curers by the defendant. More
The appeal was noted against the arbitral award handed down on 10thMay 2013.The Appellant was employed by the Respondent as a Senior Promotions Officer in the Sales Marketing Department. His contract of employment was terminated following a retrenchment exercise which resulted in the Retrenchment Committee issuing a retrenchment certificate on the 20th of December, 2012. The Appellant subsequently referred a complaint of alleged unlawful retrenchment and non-payment of contractual entitlements to conciliation. Upon failure to conciliate the matter was referred to an independent arbitrator. More
The appeal was noted as against the decision by the Appeals Committee which confirmed Appellant’s dismissal from employment with effect from 2 September, 2011 on charges of “extortion-proved dishonesty.”
The facts surrounding the misconduct charges were that the Appellant who was employed as invoicing clerk, on the 4th of July 2010 used one Tendai Janha’s profile to generate on the computer an invoice for a non-trading company that is Madziwa Trading. The transaction turned out to be fraudulent as the Respondent lost goods through the delivery of goods to a person other than the purported customer shown on the invoice.... More
This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. Leave is being sought by the employee in a labour dispute between him and the employer. More
The appellant and the fourth and fifth respondents are aspiring parliamentary candidates. The appellant’s nomination papers were rejected while those of the fourth and fifth respondents were accepted by the first respondent. The second respondent is the Electoral Commission responsible for conducting elections in Zimbabwe. The third respondent is the Minister responsible for the administration of the Electoral Act (Chapter 2:13) and the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission Act (Chapter 2:12), herein after called the Electoral Act and the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission Act. More
The appellant was convicted on his own plea of guilty, of contravening s 157 (1) (a) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23] (unlawful possession or use of dangerous drugs). He was found in possession of 4.660 kg of dagga. He was sentenced to 36 months imprisonment of which 12 months imprisonment was suspended on conditions of good behaviour.
He has noted an appeal against sentence. The grounds of appeal are stated as follows:
“1. The Magistrate misdirected herself when she did not give specific and detailed reasons why community service was not imposed as the optional... More
