Appellant appealed to this Court against an arbitration award made in favour of Respondent. The grounds of complained that,
“1. The Arbitrator erred and misdirected himself in law by concluding that the Respondent exercised reasonable skill, due diligence and care in the execution of his duties.
2. the Arbitrator erred and misdirected himself in law in interpreting the Respondent’s letter of promotion of 1st December2000, in particular, by concluding that the Respondent cannot be held to have exhibited gross incompetency or inefficiency in the performance of his duties when his contract of employment did not oblige him to check in... More
The appellant was, before his dismissal, the provincial Labour Administrator for Masvingo Province.
On 4 November 2014 appellant was arrested by CID on allegations of receiving a bribe as a result of a trap executed at the instance of Great Zimbabwe University. On 5 November he was sentenced upon conviction to 3 years imprisonment. More
This application arises from the judgment of my sister MAKARAU JP (as she then was) delivered on 21 November 2007 under case number HC 6844/06 (Judgment HH 81/2007). The applicants sought and were granted an order that certain immovable property, namely, stand 658, of Quinington Township of Subdivision 6 of Quinington of Borrowdale be transferred to themselves pursuant to a contract of sale entered into between them and the respondent. More
At the hearing of this matter, the respondent was automatically barred from appearing before the court as he had not filed his heads of argument within the time prescribed in the rules. A formal court application was filed on 4 September, 2007 seeking the up-liftment of the bar. The application was opposed. More
Plaintiff issued summons in which she sought a decree of divorce, custody and maintenance in respect of their minor child, a division of matrimonial assets and an order that defendant be ordered to purchase 63 120 First Mutual shares or alternatively pay their equivalent value and costs of suit. More
Plaintiff issued summons against the defendant seeking an order that defendant pays to her the sum of $7 000 000, 00 being damages for pain, shock suffering and contumelia suffered by her as a result of an unlawful assault perpetrated upon her person but certain members of the Zimbabwe National Army during the course and scope of their employment with the defendant on 4th June 2003 at 293/23rd Crescent, Glen View 1, Harare. Plaintiff holds defendant vicariously liable for the delict committed by members of his troop. More
At the base of a multi-layered series of interloculocutory applications lies the quest by applicant to set aside a confirmed judicial salein execution. The subject of that sale is her former matrimonial home, a property in which she claims (and seeks to rescue) a 50% undivided share. The property was attached and sold in 2015, and eventually transferred to first respondent in 2019. In that regard, applicant approached this court seeking leave to file out of time, an objection to the confirmation of that sale by second respondent. That application was opposed by first respondent who later moved the court... More
Introduction. This is an application for bail which is necessitated by the termination of bail by the operation of law after an accused has pleaded to the charge. An accused person may be re-admitted to bail, on similar or other conditions that the court may in its discretion consider. It is my view that admission to bail pending trial and to bail once trial has commenced, are inquiries what are based on different considerations, because the circumstances will have changed. The basis on which bail is opposed pre-trial are not necessarily the same as that on which it is opposed... More
In 1989 the plaintiff and defendant married each other in terms of customary law. Their marriage was however not registered. After a period of about ten years living together in the manner of husband and wife they decided to have their marriage solemnized in terms of the Marriages Act [Cap 5:11] of the Laws of Zimbabwe. Their marriage was thus solemnized on 11 February 1999 at Harare in terms of the Marriages Act. That marriage still subsists. More
An order for civil imprisonment is hereby granted in favor of the plaintiff
2. The Sheriff for Zimbabwe, or his deputy, is ordered to arrest the defendant, George Frangoulis of 86 Maungwe Street, Rusape, Zimbabwe, for a period of 90 (Ninety) days in the Remand Prison and deliver him together with a copy of this writ, to the Prison at Remand, where he shall be kept until:
(a) Defendant has paid the judgment debt, together with the interest and costs that are due or
(b) The period of 90 (ninety) days form the dater of his delivery to the prison... More
This is an appeal against the decision of the Negotiating Committee for the National Employment Council for the Commercial Sectors (Negotiating Committee) handed down on 10 December 2019. The Negotiating Committee upheld the conviction of the appellant on a charge of misconduct levelled against him, and his consequent dismissal from employment. More
Appellant was dismissed from Respondent’s employment as a data capture clerk on allegations of contravening the Respondent company code of conduct. He appealed to the internal appeal structures without success. He has now appealed to this court against both the guilt verdict and the dismissal penalty which were confirmed by the Respondent’s internal appeals body. More
At the onset of oral argument in this Court respondent raised a point in limine which appellant opposed. The point was that appellant filed 2 documents which were not part of the proceedings in the tribunals a quo. It is expatiated in respondent’s heads of argument as follows:
“10. The first document purportedly signed on the 23rd of November 2019 seeks to suggest that cash deposits of RTGS $400 and RTGS $1 700 had been authorised by Susan Togarepi, also known as Susan Nyaradzo Mushaike, whilst the second document purportedly signed on the 25th of November 2019 seeks to suggest... More
Appellant appealed to this Court against his dismissal from employment by Respondent. The appeal was made in terms of Section 92D of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01. Respondent opposed the appeal. More
