This is an appeal against the decision of the Chief Executive Officer finding appellant guilty and dismissing her from work on allegations of misconduct at the work place. Brief facts of the matter are that appellant who was in the respondent’s employment was charged with misconduct emanating from the facts that she had acted negligently and caused loss of the employer’s ticket book. She was found guilty of the infraction. She appealed to the Chief Executive Officer without success hence the instant appeal. More
In this Urgent Chamber Application the applicant sought the following order,
“1. The Respondent and all persons claiming occupation, rights, tittle and interests through him shall remove or cause the removal of themselves and all such persons occupying the portion of Plot 13 of Sale Camp Farm purportedly identified as Stand 13 B of Sale Camp Farm.
2. Failing such removal the Sheriff of High Court be and is hereby authorised and directed to evict the Respondent and all persons claiming occupation, right; title and interests through him.
3. The Respondent and all persons claiming occupation right, tittle and interests... More
The applicant filed this application in terms of Order 32 Rule 226 of the High Court Rules 1971. I must say that the rule relates to the making of any application of whatever nature. In paragraphs 4 and 10 of her founding affidavit, applicant states that the application seeks to have a document, or an alleged agreement between “the Chikono family” and David Mahewu, be declared null and void in so far as it purports to vest rights of ownerhip of No. 7 Fernspruit Township of Essexvale Estate, Umzingwane District to 1st respondent (David Mahewu). It is in that regard,... More
On 29 September 2016 the applicant appeared in the Magistrates Court sitting at Mutare facing a charge of unlawfully possessing a specially protected animal, namely a pangolin in contravention of s 45 (1) (b) as read with s 128 of the General Laws Amendment Act (GN 148/2011) of the Parks and Wildlife Act [Chapter 20:14]. In short, the applicant in the company of 4 accomplices had approached a police officer who was disguised as a potential buyer with the intention of selling two live pangolins. The applicant was actually carrying one of the pangolins. They got arrested. The applicant pleaded... More
The applicant seeks a declaratur that;
1) The Water (Permits) Amendment Regulations, 2015 (No. 5) published under Statutory Instrument 52/2015 on 24 April 2015 by the third respondent is ultra vires the Water Act [Chapter 20:24] and is accordingly invalid and of no force and effect. More
In this application the applicant applies for bail pending appeal based on changed circumstances following the dismissal of his previous application by MUREMBA J on 13 December, 2017 in a judgment recorded as HH 216/18. On 22 February, 2018, the applicant acting in person, filed an application which was however withdrawn by his legal practitioners after assuming agency. They then filed the present application on 2 March, 2018. The legal practitioners requested of MUREMBA J for reasons for her order dismissing the previous application. MUREMBA J duly supplied the said reasons as judgment HH 216/18 as already indicated. On 12... More
At the end of hearing argument for both parties, the Court dismissed the application with costs on the legal practitioner and client scale. It was indicated that reasons for the decision would follow in due course. More
Appellant appealed to this Court against her dismissal from employment by Respondent. She was charged with seven (7) counts of misconduct. These were violations of Group D – Most serious offences – category 25. She was acquitted of four of the counts but found guilty on 3 of the counts.Her ground of appeals were three- fold as follows,
“1. The Grievances and Disciplinary Committee erred and misdirected itself in finding Appellant guilty of Count 1 of the charges, as the duties she is charged with do not fall into duties assigned either expressly or tacitly.
2. The Grievances and Disciplinary... More
This matter relates to two appeals. As both records were placed before us we decided to determine both appeals together. The first appeal is an appeal against the magistrates Court sitting at Chinhoyi dated 26 April 2005. In this case the court made an order for the eviction of the appellant from house 255 Kuwadzana Banket, payment of rent in the sum of Z$20 000 per month from date 8 July 2003 and costs of suit. Following the noting of an appeal by the appellant against this judgment, the respondent applied for and was granted leave to execute the order... More
This was supposed to be an application for condonationof late noting of appeal. The applicant is represented but has not filed Heads of Argument. The Rules require a party who is represented to file Heads of Argument (Rule 19). No reasonable explanation has been proffered. The legal practitioners of record have sent a correspondent to appear.(Mr Muhlekiwa of Mahuni&Mutatu Attorneys at Law). Mr Laita is said to be attending to a matter at Marondera Magistrates’ Court. There is no proof that this is so. Further even if this was so the Labour Court is superior to the Magistrates’ Court and... More
On the 28th October, 2015 I directed that the parties compile and file a full and proper record after which I would then consider whether to determine the matter on the record or direct that a court hearing be held.
The parties duly complied with the directive and having gone through the record, I am of the view that I can determine the appeal on the record. Section 89 (2)(a)(1) of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01] refers.
Appellant was dismissed from Respondent’s employ after having been found guilty of six out of eight counts of fraud. He appealed through the... More
This is an appeal against the judgement of the High Court dismissing an application for the rescission of a default judgment granted in favour of the first respondent against the second respondent in Case No. HC 9554/16. The application was brought in terms of r 449(1)(a) of the High Court Rules 1971. The applicant in that matter sought the rescission of the default judgement as well as his joinder in the main proceedings. More
This is an appeal against the decision of the Magistrates Court, sitting at Harare on the 11th of May 2007, dismissing the appellant’s application for bail. The appellant was arrested two days before on a charge of contravening section 3 of the Gold Trade Act [Chapter 21:03], viz. for unlawfully possessing gold without a licence or permit. The penalty prescribed for the offence, as recently amended, is a mandatory prison term of 5 to 10 years in the absence of special circumstances. More
The applicant, a former constable in the Zimbabwe Republic Police, was charged with and convicted of contravening paragraph 11 of the Schedule to the Police Act as read with sections 29 and 34 of the same. He was sentenced to 14 days imprisonment and was subsequently discharged from the police service. More
