1. This is a chamber application in which the applicant seeks condonation for failure to comply with Rule 38 (1) (a) of the Supreme Court Rules, 2018 and for extension of time within which to file and serve a notice of appeal. The application is opposed. More
1. This is an appeal against the decision of the Labour Court (‘the court a quo’) wherein the court dismissed the appellants’ application for review after finding that the appellants had elected the wrong procedure in proceeding by way of review as opposed to an appeal. After hearing submissions by both counsel, the court dismissed the appeal and indicated that the reasons for the decision would be furnished in due course. The reasons follow hereunder. More
This an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court (the court a quo) sitting at Harare dated 1 March 2022, setting aside the second appellant’s decision to deny the respondent leave to sue the first appellant and granting the respondent leave in terms of s 6 (b) of the Reconstruction of State Indebted Insolvent Companies Act [chapter 24:27] (the Act) to institute proceedings against the first appellant for damages for breach of contract. More
This is an application in terms of s 167(2)(d) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe for the Court to determine whether Parliament or the President has failed to fulfil a constitutional obligation. The applicants aver that the respondents have failed to do so in respect of the presentation and passage of the Local Government Amendment Act No. 8 of 2016 in Parliament. It is further averred that presenting and passing a Bill in contravention of the Constitution amounts to a failure to fulfil a constitutional obligation. More
This is the unanimous decision of this Court. This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court handed down on 25 January 2021 dismissing the appellant’s claims for recognition as the legitimate Medical Professionals and Allied Workers Union and ancillary relief.
The court a quo found that the meetings of 30 and 31 January 2018 had been meetings of the National Council of the Union and that not only were they properly convened but they also constituted a quorum. It also found that there was a breach of the constitution of the union in convening the congress... More
This is an application made in terms of s 175(3) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe, 2013, for an order confirming a declaration of constitutional invalidity made by the High Court of Zimbabwe. More
The first applicant is the erstwhile Mining Commissioner for Masvingo a post which he says has since been abolished. No issue arises from the said abolition of post. The second applicant is a quasi-judicial board established in terms of s 6 of the Mines and Minerals Act [Chapter 21:05] whereas the third applicant is the Minister responsible for the administration of the Act. On the other hand the respondent is a mining concern holding various mining blocks within the first applicant’s area of jurisdiction. More
This is an application for condonation for the late filing of an application for leave to appeal conjoined with the application for leave to appeal. The applicants have filed this application in terms of r 5 as read with r 32 of the Constitutional Court Rules, 2016 (the Rules). It is a composite chamber application for condonation and for leave to note an appeal against the decision of the Supreme Court in case number SC 107/21. More
This is an appeal against the entire judgment of the High Court of Zimbabwe sitting at Harare handed down on 16 November 2016 in which the following order was granted:
1. “That it be and is hereby declared that the appointment of the executive committee of the Al Falaah Trust is invalid as it is not in accordance with the terms of the Notarial (sic) Deed of Trust and is therefore an unlawful delegation of the powers of the trustees.
2. That it be and is hereby declared that any decisions and actions taken in the name of the executive... More
Under case no CCZ 10/2022, the applicants applied to intervene in certain ongoing proceedings brought by the first respondent against the second and third respondents. The essence of the order sought in these ongoing proceedings is a declaration that the second respondent failed to fulfil a constitutional obligation, the precise nature of which is yet to be determined. I shall hereafter refer to these ongoing proceedings as “the main matter”.
The application for intervention was placed before me for determination. Before the hearing of the application, the applicants made an application for my recusal.
After hearing submissions from the parties... More
After the provisional order had been granted, the first respondent sought the joinder of the appellants which was granted. On the return date the High Court, after hearing the parties, granted an order which had not been sought by either party. The appellants noted an appeal against that order and raised four grounds of appeal of which the third ground attacked the granting of an order not sought by the parties. In their Heads of Argument, the respondents conceded that the court a quo had irregularly granted an order not sought by the parties. More
This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court handed down on 2 July 2020 inter alia nullifying the Mashoko-Kusisa Family Trust, directing the first appellant and the third respondents to render a full account of the business operations and functions of that trust from 8 May 2006 and dismissing the claim for the eviction of the first respondent and those claiming occupation through her from the trust property known as No 1 Franco Close, Borrowdale Harare (the property). More
(1) This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court, granting a spoliation order in terms of which the appellants were ordered to restore possession of Danga 16442, Oceana 5545, Reedbuck 2 5535BM, Reedbuck 1 55 35BM and Lucky 8260 BM mining claims (hereinafter referred to as “the mining claims”) to the first respondent and finding the first appellant guilty of contempt of court. More
These matters were referred to this court by a magistrate’s court in terms of s 24(2) of the former Constitution of Zimbabwe (“the former Constitution”). The applicants allege a breach of ss 15(1) and 18 of the former Constitution. The relief sought is a permanent stay of criminal proceedings. More
This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court of Zimbabwe (court a quo) handed down on 5 October 2022, dismissing the appellants’ application for the setting aside of an arbitral award made in terms of Article 34 of the First Schedule to the Arbitration Act [Chapter 7:15] (‘the Arbitration Act’). More
