Electronic Court judgements

Browse all Court Judgements

This is an application for leave to appeal a judgment of this Court to the Supreme Court. The application is opposed. Judgment was granted by this Court on 4 May 2012. The applicant filed its notice of appeal to the Supreme Court on 26 May 2012. The applicant then filed its Heads of Argument on 20 September 2012. The respondent has submitted that the applicant ought to have filed its heads within fourteen days. This is what is contemplated by Rule 19 of the Rules of this Court Statutory Instrument 59 of 2006. The respondent submitted that in view of... More

On 26 July 2024 under case number HCH 2530/24 (the main matter) this Court granted an order in favour of Korzim against the Minister, the Provincial Mining Director and Kingston. Having become aware of the existence of the order and that the ejectment was scheduled for 8 August 2024, Fourteen Karate, on 6 August 2024, instituted two Court proceedings. The first was a Court application for rescission of the order granted in the main matter on the basis that it was erroneously granted in the absence of Fourteen Karate, which claims that it is affected by that order. More

This matter was placed before me as an opposed application and a counter application. For the sake of consistency, the parties shall remain as cited in the main application. More

The applicant was convicted of theft of a motor vehicle as defined in s 113 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act, [Cap 9:23] and was duly sentenced. The applicant noted an appeal against the decision of the court a quo and has approached this court with an application for bail pending appeal. The respondent in opposition of the application raised points in limine. The court moved for address on merit after both the applicant and respondent counsel had submitted oral argument against and for upholding of points in limine respectively in their documents filed of record and from... More

Unhappy that the Magistrates Court sitting at Harare denied him bail pending trial, the appellant has come before me on appeal. More

On 29 April 1995 the plaintiff and defendant were joined in holy matrimony by a minister of religion in terms of the Marriages Act Chapter 5:11. That must have been a joyous occasion, not only to the two but to their respective families and friends. Sadly 14 years down the line the couple no longer wishes to continue as husband and wife. Whatever happened to their vows to live together ‘till death do us part’ is only known by the two of them. More

This is an appeal against conviction and sentence. The appellant was convicted after a trial, of one count of theft of trust property as defined in s 113 (2) (d) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]. He was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment of which 3 years imprisonment was suspended for 5 years on condition that during that period he does not commit any offence involving dishonesty for which he is sentenced to imprisonment without the option of a fine. The effective period of imprisonment was 7 years. More

MUTEVEDZI J: For those that support it Zimbabwe’s land reform programme will eternally be famed as one of the most iconic revolutions in African history. To those who oppose it, the scheme is immortally etched in their minds as notoriety of epic proportions. The programme commenced more than two decades ago. In its formative years, it was confronted by fierce resistance both politically and legally by a section of those who owned commercial farms across the country. After Government had weathered the political storm parliament moved in to exorcise the many legal stratagems employed the erstwhile commercial farmers to obstruct... More

The applicant seeks an order setting aside an arbitration award made by the 3rd respondent in September 2004 and compelling the transfer of Stand No. 2950, Bluff Hill, Harare, into her name. In the alternative, in the event that the property cannot be so transferred, she seeks an award of damages for the difference between the original purchase price paid by her and the prevailing market value of the property. At the hearing of this matter, counsel for the applicant accepted that the applicant’s claim should be confined to the alternative claim for damages. More

1. This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court (court a quo). The suspension from office of the appellant led to a flurry of court applications in the court a quo. This is just one of them in which the court a quo dismissed the appellant’s application. The application was made in terms of s 4 of the Administrative Justice Act [Chapter 10:28] (‘the Act’) on the basis that the respondents had failed to comply with the provisions of s 3(1)(a) of the Act. More

This is an application lodged in terms of r 32 of the Constitutional Court Rules, 2016, for leave to appeal against the whole judgment of the Supreme Court (the court a quo) handed down on 14 January 2022 as Judgment No. S-01-2022. The decision of the court a quo had dismissed the applicant’s appeal against the judgment of the High Court in Case No. HC 2302/20. More

[1] The first and third applicants seek condonation for the late noting of an appeal and extension of time within which to appeal. The application is contested by the first, third, fourth and sixth respondents. [2] The parties are fighting over the control of the Stoneridge Residents Association (the association). More

This is an appeal against the order of a “Committee” of employer representative and the Human Resources Manager. The brief history of this matter is that Appellant was employed as a Depot Manager. He was charged with four counts of misconduct that is - Fraud, forgery, corruption, falsification. - Theft. - Failure to disclose any interests in a company conducting business with GMB in which one has an interest or influence. - Any act of misconduct or omission inconsistent with the fulfillment of the express or implied conditions of one’s contract of employment. More

The applicant approached this court in terms of r 31 of the High Court Rules, 2021 where he is seeking the dismissal of the respondent’s action instituted under case number HC 7235/20 on the basis that it is frivolous and vexatious More

The appellants were arraigned before a Bindura Magistrate facing a charge of contravening section 45(1)(b) as read with section 128(1)(b) of the Parks and Wildlife Act Chapter 20:14 “found in possession of ivory”. More