Welcome to Midlands State University Library

Court Judgements



Browse all Court Judgements
The applicant, an ex-constable in the Zimbabwe Republic Police appeared before a single officer on 18 December 2015 facing a charge of contravening paragraph 34 of the Schedule to the Police Act [Chapter 11:10] i.e., “Omitting or neglecting to perform any duty or performing any duty in an improper manner.” He was convicted and sentenced to a term of imprisonment. The applicant appealed the conviction and sentence to the Commissioner General of Police, and the appeal was dismissed in its entirety. Subsequent to the dismissal of the appeal, a Board of Inquiry was convened to inquire into his suitability to... More

I heard this application on 16 May 2022. I delivered an ex tempore judgment in which I granted the applicant’s prayer as contained in her draft order. On 23 May 2022 the respondent wrote requesting written reasons for my decision. My reasons are these: The applicant who is an ex-constable in the Zimbabwe Republic Police was charged under para 35 of the Schedule to the Police Act and was convicted. She appealed to the first respondent who is the Police Commissioner-General. He dismissed her appeal but did not furnish her with reasons for the dismissal of her appeal. He convened... More

This is an application for a declaratur in which the applicant seeks the following relief: 1. The discharge of the applicant from the Police Service by the 2nd respondent is hereby declared unlawful and wrongful. 2. The 2nd and 3rd respondents are ordered to reinstate the applicant into the Police Service without loss of salary and benefits. 3. The respondents are ordered to pay the costs of suit on a punitive scale.” More

This is an application for review in which the applicant seeks the following relief: “1. The findings of the board of inquiry which was held on the 16th of February 2017 be and is hereby declared null and void. 2. The respondents are ordered to reinstate the applicant back into the Police Service forthwith with full benefits and privileges as from the 7th of November 2017 up to date. 3. The respondents are ordered to pay costs of suit.” More

This is an application for a declaration that the first and second respondents’ failure to furnish the applicant with reasons for their decision is unlawful and wrongful. The applicant also seeks to setting aside of his discharge from the Zimbabwe Republic Police, and for an order that he be reinstated to his employment as a police officer, together with costs of suit on the higher scale. The application is opposed by the respondents More

At the hearing of these matters Mr L. Musika applied to have the two cases consolidated since the facts, issues and legal principles to be argued are the same. Mr Ndou for the applicants agreed and both cases were consolidated. The result is that I will deliver one judgment instead of two. The background in respect of each case is as follows: 1. Ex-Sergeant Mafenya Both parties have not divulged what caused the applicants’ discharge by the 1st respondent. Be that as it may, on 7 November 2016, applicant received a radio communication from the 1st respondent to the effect... More

The seventeen applicants had been members of the police force of different ranks until their discharge at different times for various misdemeanours. Through the law firm of Mugiya & Macharaga they each applied to this court, on separate processes and on different dates,to challenge their discharge and seek reinstatement. One group brought review applications. Another sought declaratory orders. The two counsel, in consultation with the Registrar of this court, agreed that the circumstances of the applicants’ discharge, the nature of their complaints before the court and the remedies sought, were substantially the same. As such,counsel arranged to have all the... More

The three applicants are ex-constables in the Zimbabwe Republic Police. On 2 May 2014 the three applicants were charged for contravening para 27 of the schedule to the Police Act [Chapter 11:10], “acting in an unbecoming manner or disorderly manner or any manner prejudicial to good order or discipline or reasonably likely to bring discredit to the Police Force”. More

The applicant applied for a declaratur. He moved the court to declare that: i. his trial under the Police Act for the offence he was tried under ordinary law which amounted to dual prosecution be declared unlawful - and ii. his discharge from the Police Service following his conviction under the Police Act for the offence he was acquitted of under ordinary law be declared unlawful. More

This is a court application in terms of which the applicant seeks a declaratur. The applicant an ex-constable in the Zimbabwe Republic Police sued The Commissioner General of Police, The Police Service Commission and the Minister of Home Affairs for the following order: ‘(1) That refusal by the 1st respondent to furnish applicant with reasons for his discharge be and is hereby declared unlawful and wrongful. (2) The failure by the 1st respondent to afford applicant the right to be heard before being discharged from the Police Service be and is hereby declared to be wrongful and unlawful. (3) The... More

This is a court application for a dclaratur wherein applicants seek the following relief: “1. The discharge of the applicants from the Police Service by the respondents be and is hereby declared unlawful and wrongful. 2. The respondents are ordered to reinstate the applicants into the Police Service forthwith. 3. The respondents are ordered to pay costs of suit on a client attorney scale”. The applicants’ case is based on the following facts: On the 26th day of July 2016 they were discharged from the Police Service by the 1st respondent. Both appealed against the dismissal to the 2nd respondent... More

In this court application the court has been called upon to decide a point in limine on whether the two grounds for review raised by the applicant are valid grounds and if not whether the application should be treated as fatally defective. The applicant seeks an order in the following terms; “IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. The 2nd respondent’s failure to reinstate the applicant into the Police Service after she appealed in terms of section 51 of the Police Act is declared wrongful and unlawful. 2. The 1st respondent’s failure to give the applicant written reasons for the dismissal of... More

The applicant seeks a declaratur that the first and second respondents’ failure to furnish the applicant with reasons for their decisions is unlawful and wrongful, that the applicant’s discharge from the police service is accordingly set aside, that the respondents are ordered to reinstate the applicant into the police service forthwith and that the respondents are ordered to pay costs of suit on a punitive scale. More

This is an application for an order that the alleged refusal or failure of the respondents to furnish the applicant with reasons for her discharge be declared to be unlawful and for the setting aside of the discharge of the applicant from the Zimbabwe Republic Police consequent upon the finding, as prayed for, that the discharge is wrongful and unlawful. The applicant also seeks costs against the respondents on the attorney-client scale. The application is opposed by the first respondent. More

This is a court application for review of the respondents’ decision to discharge the applicant from the Police Service as being unfit for Police Duties as he was found to be a stammer and had serious communication problems. More