MAKONI J: The applicant and 3 of his accomplices appeared before a Magistrate charged with murder. The brief facts of the matter are that the applicant and his accomplices approached Gletwin farm in Chishawasha armed with pistols and with two get away cars. They disarmed the two guards who were by the gate by tying them with shoe laces and bag handles. They also handcuffed a guard who was in the chicken run. They also assaulted him. The guard screamed and one Edson Manembe who was guarding the storeroom heard the screams. As he approached the chicken run, armed with... More
As can be gleaned from the pleadings filed of record the Chieftainship dispute of the Mugabe clan in Masvingo province has been raging on for a long time since the death of the then substantive Chief Mugabe one Mude Mudavanhu in November 2009.
The 3rd respondent was appointed the Acting Chief Mugabe pending the appointment of the substantive Chief since the death of the substantive Chief Mugabe in November 2009. The 3rd respondent has been so acting until his appointment as the substantive Chief Mugabe on 23 January 2023 in terms of section 283 (1) (a) of the Constitution of... More
This is an application for dismissal for want of prosecution of several matters involving both parties over the same subject matter thatbeing aland dispute.
Prior to enrolment of the matter on my opposed roll, I hadnoticed that the applicant had not furnished either the files or any the document pertaining to the other matters which he desired to be dismissed under the present case number. I found this omission to be counter-intuitive bearing in mind that he was praying for a dismissal of those very matters. As a result, at the hearing of the matter I caused the matter to... More
The brief synopsis of the matter are spelt out by the letter written to the Registrar by the fourth Respondent and the events unfolded thus:
1. The Sheriff was instructed by Messrs Chihambakwe, Mutizwa and Partners Legal Practitioners representing Zimbabwe Electricity Transmission and Distribution Company (ZETDC) to execute a court order under case No. 5641/17 to recover a judgment debt of $28284.50, interest and costs including the Sheriffs costs of $180 against Nan Jiang Mine, the second Respondent herein.
2. Attachment of goods was done on 5 of June 2019.
3. The Sheriff received instructions to stay execution from Chihambakwe... More
This is a Court Application for leave to execute pending appeal where the Applicant is praying for the following relief:
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. The application for Execution of the Order under HC 40/20 dated 23 July 2020 pending the determination of SC 333/20 is hereby granted.
2. The Fourth Respondent is granted leave to give effect to the Writ of Delivery of Movables lodged on 27 July 2020 under case HC 40/20.
3. During the pendency of SC 333/20 the Applicant is temporarily interdicted from disposing of Cat Caterpillar Dump Truck 769C.
4. The First and Second Respondents... More
This is an appeal against the decision of the respondent’s Appeals Officer that was delivered on 31 October 2014. The Appeals Officer upheld the decision of the hearing committee to dismiss the appellant for the alleged misconduct.
The brief history of the matter is that
- Appellant was employed by the respondent as an auto electrician with effect from 1 April 2012.
- On 26 September 2014 he was charged for an act of misconduct in terms of the Collective Bargaining Agreement for the Motor Industry Code of Conduct for “any act or omission inconsistent with the fulfilment of the... More
The plaintiff instituted anactiorei vindicatioaction and consequential relief in the form of holding over damages initially against the first and second defendants. The original summons and declaration were issued on 28 October 2016. By way of an amendment to the summons and declaration issued on 31 October 2018, the third defendant was added as a party to the proceedings in his capacity as the Executor Dative to the estate of the Late Edmore Tererai Chitiyo (the late Chitiyo). More
1. This is an application for bail pending appeal against both conviction and sentence.
2. On 29 September 2022 the applicant was convicted on a charge of criminal abuse of duty as a public officer as defined in s 174(1) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:28]. He was sentenced to 30 months imprisonment of which 6 months were suspended for 5 years on the usual conditions of good behaviour.
3. The Court found that during the period extending from November 2018 to September 2019 and at Chitungwiza Municipality the appellant, a Works Manager, acted contrary to... More
1. This is an appeal against both conviction and sentence.
2. It is pursuant to the appellant’s conviction on a charge of criminal abuse of duty as a public officer as defined in s 174(1) of the (Criminal Law (Codification and Reform ) Act [Chapter 9:28] and the sentence of thirty months imprisonment of which six months were suspended on the condition of good behaviour.
3. The trial court found that the appellant, an Acting Works Manager in the employ of Chitungwiza Municipality, acted contrary to or inconsistent with his duty by unlawfully approving a site plan in favour of... More
This appeal has been decided on the record in terms of Section 89 2(a)(i) of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01].
Appellant was in Respondent’s employ as a gang leader before his dismissal on allegations of theft of gold ore. More
On the 10th of June 2011 Appellant was suspended from duty on the ground that he had fraudulently generated three (3) journals namely:-
- Morgan Zintec for $406.00
- Chitungwiza Hospital for $459.95
- Dudzai Primary School for $550.01
without supporting documentation.
This was an act of misconduct in terms of Section 20 of Respondent’s Code of Conduct S.I. 148 of 2009 the penalty of which is a dismissal for a first breach.
For committing the above act of misconduct (fraud) Appellant was found guilty by the Disciplinary Committee and was dismissed from Respondent’s employment. He noted appeals to the... More
The defendants (who are the excipients in this matter) have excepted to the plaintiff’s (who is respondent) declaration and I have, to decide whether that exception has merit or not. More
