This is an application to compel the 1st respondent to pass transfer of an immovable property commonly known as Lot 1 of stand 147, Prospect, Harare. More
This is an application for quantification of damages pursuant to an order by the Supreme Court in the case of Zimnat Life Assurance Limited v George Dikinya SC 30-10 whose paragraph 1 reads as follows:
“1. The order of the court a quo is amended to read:
‘The appellant is to be reinstated to his former position as managing director of ZIMNAT with no loss of salary or other benefits and in the event that reinstatement is no longer possible the appellant is to be paid such damages as may be agreed between the parties or that failing, as may... More
A litigant who applies for the removal of the bar which operates against him admits the simple fact that he violated the rules(s) of court. His application for upliftment of the bar is, to all intents and purposes, a motion by him for condonation for his unwholesome conduct. He is, therefore, expected to be candid with the court, to give plausible reasons for his failure to comply with the rules of court and to place the court into his confidence in his effort to justify the condonation which he is moving the court to grant to him. More
The plaintiff seeks a default judgment against the defendant under circumstances I shall outline below for payment of US$37 914. 16, interest, costs and collection commission. More
: On 22 April 2013 the applicant applied for bail pending trial. I dismissed the application the following day giving my reasons ex tempo. The applicant has requested for written reasons for my decision. These are they:- More
MUZENDA J: This urgent chamber application was brought to me on Friday 29th September 2018 after hours and I issued an interim order interdicting the demolition of a structure constructed on stand 19828 Harare Township registered in Pokugara Properties (Private) Ltd, (the 3rd respondent) and directed the Registrar to set the matter down for the 1st October 2018. On 1 October 2018 the parties agreed to defer the hearing to the 2nd October 2018 to allow the first-third and fourth respondents to file their opposing papers. More
: This matter is decided on the papers without the benefit of oral submissions as agreed to by counsels. This is an opposed application for an interdict in which the applicant seeks an order in the following terms; More
At the onset of this appeal the respondent took the point that the prayer by applicant was improperly worded to the extent that it rendered the appeal a nullity. It is only this point which is addressed by this judgment. More
At the commencement of the proceedings a Mr Chavarika from the National Prosecuting Authority informed the Court that he was representing Respondent’s Counsel who has requested him to make an application for postponement of the matter. The reason for the application was that Respondent’s Counsel had believed the matter was going to be held in Harare instead of Mutare. The Court dismissed the application on the basis that Respondent was served with the notice on 31st July 2014 clearly which showed that the hearing would be held in Mutare. This marked a lack of diligence on the part of Respondent’s... More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award handed down on12 February 2013, in terms of which it was ruled that the respondent was unfairly dismissed, and should be reinstated to his employment with the respondent. More
This is a matter in which the applicant was wrongfully dismissed from the respondent’s employ. This Court ordered that the applicant be reinstated or alternatively that the respondent, awarded the applicant the appropriate damages in lieu of reinstatement. The respondent did not reinstate the applicant. The parties failed to agree and the parties approached the Court for quantification of damages. More
After hearing argument by the respective parties, I dismissed the application with costs on an attorney and client scale. I now give my reasons. On 20 January 2020, the applicant filed an urgent chamber application and submitted that, in 2002, he obtained rights to extract minerals in Mvuma through special grants SG 2854 and SG 2858. Before the expiry of the special grants in 2011, he wrote to the second respondent through the office of the Mining Commissioner, seeking their renewal. Thereafter, on 20 April 2018, the second respondent acknowledged receipt of the applicant’s letter, and indicated that applicant’s file... More
MUCHAWA P,:
This is an application for quantification of damages pursuant to an earlier order of this Honourable Court which ordered Applicant’s reinstatement to his position of General Manager with Respondent. In the event that reinstatement was no longer possible, Respondent was ordered to pay damages in lieu of reinstatement. Parties could not agree on the quantum and have referred back the issue to this Court. This is now the matter before us. More
This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. The record was erroneously kept in the registry instead of it being referred for consideration of judgment. Hence while the matter was heard in October 2012, the judgment is only being considered in January 2013. The confusion regarding the movement of the record is regretted More
