This is an appeal against the conviction of the appellant on one count of rape by the Regional Magistrates Court, sitting at Bindura. The appellant, who was legally unrepresented, pleaded not guilty to the charge. He was convicted and sentenced to a term of 8 years imprisonment of which a period of 2 years was suspended on condition of good behaviour. More
The facts that gave rise to this dispute are as follows:
In January 2010 the first applicant Givemore Sambadzi, purchased certain immovable property known as Stand 2048 Chadcombe township of Stand 1257 Chadcombe Township from one Charity Nyarai Mupaya and a Deed of Transfer was made in his favour. In November 2010, the first applicant then entered into an agreement of sale with the second applicant Salatiel Nhubu regarding this property. More
This is an appeal against the entire judgment of a Magistrate sitting at Mutare where the court a quo convicted the two appellants of contravening s 45 (1)(b) as read with s 128 of Parks and Wildlife Act [Chapter 2014] as read with s 2 of Statutory Instrument 71 of 2002. The two appellants were sentenced to the mandatory 9 years imprisonment. They appealed against both conviction and sentence. The appeal is opposed by the state. More
The brief facts are that Appellant was employed by the Respondent as a forester. His duties involved raising invoices on work done. Appellant raised invoices for work which was either not done at all or if done not properly done. Invoices were raised and paid for work allegedly done on compartment 045. In reality no work was done on that compartment. He also raised invoices for work done on compartment number Nyr108 when certain corrections needed to be done on that compartment. Invoices were only to be raised on satisfactory completion of work done. As a result Appellant was charged... More
This is an appeal against the decision of the Harare magistrate’s Court in terms of which the appellant was denied bail. Appellant was charged with unlawful entry into premises in aggravating circumstances as defined in s 131 (1) (a) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23] as read with s 131 (2) (e) of the said Act. The allegations were that on the 13th October 2020 the appellant unlawfully intentionally and without authority from Mahmud (complainant) entered using duplicate keys to open the locked warehouse and stole property therefrom consisting of coffee mugs, dinner plates, water glasses,... More
This application was placed before the court as an urgent court application in terms of the proviso to r 59(6), as read with r 65(8) of the High Court Rules, 2021. The timelines within which further pleadings were to be filed were truncated in terms of the proviso to r 59(6). More
The factual background of this matter is generally common cause. It is this:-
- that Appellant was engaged on a renewable 3 month fixed term contract. After every 3 months the contract will be renewed.
- that upon its termination on 31st July 2011 Appellant had been in Respondent’s employ for 11 continuous years on the same terms and conditions of 3 months fixed term contracts.
- that Appellant was given a verbal 5 minutes notice of termination.
Aggrieved by the Respondent’s non-renewal of
his contract, Appellant approached the Designated Agent (D/A) who issued a certificate of no settlement. More
The delay in handing down this judgment is regretted. This is more so in light of the fact that this dispute is a labour matter which has remained unresolved since 2016. More
On 14 May 1983 the applicant and the respondent were happily joined in holy matrimony as husband and wife. On 21 April 2004 that union was brought to an end by virtue of a decree of divorce granted by this court at the applicant’s instance. In granting the decree of divorce the court also dealt with other ancillary issues as between the parties such as the custody of the minor children of the marriage, access by the non custodian parent, maintenance requirements for the children and the distribution of both the movable and immovable property that the couple had acquired... More
On 6 March, 2008 Khaled Kassim Joosab (“Joosab”), the first respondent herein, leased his property, Number 4, 19 Robert Mugabe Street, Rusape (“the property”) to the applicant, one Gladys Svosve (“Gladys”). The lease which Joosab and Gladys signed was to endure for one full year. Gladys was to pay a monthly rental of ZWL$2 200 000 000 for her occupation and use of the property. More
This short judgment is intended to contextualize my order so that its rationality is appreciated when the main matter Case No. HC 112/19 is finally determined by the court should the applicant persist in it. More
On 20th December 2010 the Honourable P Shawatu made an arbitration award. In terms thereof he ordered Appellant to reinstate Respondents’ employment or alternatively to pay them damages for loss of employment. Appellant then appealed to this Court against the award. More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award. Respondent is an employee of the appellant. He is currently employed as an assistant accountant having been initially engaged as a creditors clerk in July 1997. More
This matter was initially set down on the Supreme Court roll as an appeal matter. At the hearing of the appeal, the respondent submitted that the matter raised a constitutional issue of whether the law of parate executie violates the access to the courts provision, s 69(3) of the current Constitution of Zimbabwe (“the Constitution”). Mr Matinenga applied for a referral to the Constitutional Court for the determination of that issue. More
