TSANGA J: The parties herein were married in 1989 so theirs was notably a lengthy marriage. They had four children, all of whom are now majors. What is disputed herein as part of their divorce is whether a named property should constitute the pool of assets to be divided and in the case of another of the properties, the issue is the divisional principle that ought to be applied. Among the disputed properties is a house in Budiriro, namely stand number 1217 which was acquired in 1997 in the husband’s name at a time when they were already married. The... More
The Appellant was employed by the Respondent as a Cashier. She was suspended from duty on the 20th of June 2014 on allegations of misconduct. The suspension was without pay and allowances. Following investigations Appellant was summoned to appear before a Disciplinary Committee. She was charged with ‘theft’ as defined in the relevant code i.e U.M.P Zvataida Rural District Council Employment Code of Conduct. The Disciplinary Committee found her guilty and consequently imposed a dismissal penalty. Dissatisfied the Appellant appealed internally to the Respondent’s Appeal Committee. The Appeals Committee dismissed her appeal and upheld the dismissal penalty. Still aggrieved the... More
The parties are husband and wife. They married customarily in 1981 and later solemnized their marriage in terms of the Marriage Act, [Cap 5:11], (then Cap 37), on 18 October 1985. Three children were born of the marriage and one of them is still a minor. Certain unhappy differences have arisen in the marriage. The plaintiff now seeks an order of divorce from her husband, custody of their minor child and division of their property. The defendant has counterclaimed for a decree of divorce, custody of the minor child, division of the matrimonial estate and maintenance for himself in the... More
On 22 November 2022 plaintiff issued out summons claiming the following,
“ An order declaring the marriage Certificate No,113/1992 between the late Flaviano Vitalis Mahangate and the 1st Defendant solemnized on 22nd of July 1992 null and void as it was solemnized through fraud in that the late Flaviano Vitalis Mahangate and 1st Defendant misrepresented to the 2nd Defendant to the effect that the late Flaviano Vitalis Mahangate was 33 years old when in fact he was 37 years on the date of marriage and that the late Flaviano Vitalis Mahangate was a bachelor when in fact the late Flaviano... More
1. This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court of Zimbabwe handed down on 14 July 2022, under judgment number HB 188/22.
2. After hearing the parties, the court dismissed the appeal with costs. The reasons therefor appear hereunder. More
The applicant is facing a charge of public violence as defined in s 36(1) (a) of the Criminal (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]. The allegations as depicted in the Form 242 are that on 14 June 2022, the applicant in the company of accomplices, some of whom were arrested and are now on remand and others who are still at large, conspired to avenge the murder of one Moreblessing Ali. They resultantly engaged in acts of public violence in Nyatsime area in Beatrice. They burned down the house of ZANU PF Chairperson for Nyatsime area, one George Murambatsvina. More
This is an appeal against the decision of a Regional Magistrate sitting at Chinhoyi Magistrates Court. The appellant was convicted after a protracted trial on a charge of abuse of duty as a public officer in contravention of s174 (1) of the Criminal Law Code. He was sentenced to 36 months imprisonment of which 12 months imprisonment was conditionally suspended for 5 years. More
This is an unopposed Chamber Application for granting of an appeal, made in terms of Rule 19 (3)(b) of the Labour Court Rules, Statutory Instrument 59 of 2006 (“the Rules”).
Ordinarily, this is the sort of application that could be simply disposed of by way of acourt order, without the need to write a judgment. However, the factual background to this application reveals some procedural issues that, in my view, necessitate reasons for judgment.
The applicant filed his application on 17 June 2014 under Case No LC/H/APP/249/14. This was after the respondent failed to file heads of argument in the... More
This is an appeal against the determination of the Respondent’s Appeals Authority which determination was handed down on the 19th of May 2023 and served on Appellant on the 23rd of May, 2023.
The material background facts to the matter are as follows. The Appellant was employed by the Respondent as a Loss Control Manager. On the 17th of April 2023 he was notified that, following a complaint by his immediate supervisor, the Respondent had reason to believe he had committed two acts of misconduct namely;
(i) Contravention of Section 4 (g) of Statutory Instrument 15 of 2006 i.e. habitual... More
Applicants filed this application as an urgent application seeking a provisional order worded as follows:
“Terms of the final order sought
That the First Respondent, should show cause to this Honourable Court why if any a final order in the following terms should not be made.
1. That the First Respondent his agents workers or any person acting on his behalf or with his authority, be and is hereby permanently interdicted and restrained from allowing livestock to roam and or graze and or enter Plot 4 Helensvale Estate as appears on the new Sub-division lay out or any other property... More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award wherein the appellant was alleging unfair dismissal, nonpayment of wages and underpayment of wages by respondent. The arbitrator dismissed the case on the basis that it had prescribed. More
The plaintiff and the defendant were married in Harare on 25 April 1998. Their marriage was solemnized in terms of the Marriages Act [Chapter 5:11], then Chapter 37. Prior to that, the parties were in a customary union the rituals of which were performed in or about October 1997. The parties have one minor child, a son, Tanatswa, born in April 1998. More
This is an application for bail pending trial. The trial involving the applicant and his co-accused persons commenced but was postponed owing to the insufficiency of the time allocated. The applicant made an application for admission to bail after the postponement of the trial. The application was dismissed on the basis that notwithstanding the fact that some of his co-accused had been admitted to bail the evidence led sufficiently linked the applicant to the offence in that he was identified by the witnesses who testified as one of the persons who assaulted the deceased person. In view of the seriousness... More
